Certify Electronic signature Word Safe

I am, strangely enough. My output has waned over the last year as I've become busier. But I'm happy to take the fleece. In the meantime, enjoy some of my greatest hits of the past year, most of which are not that great: Biology * Shan Kothari's answer to Is it a good idea to interbreed the various endangered tiger subspecies like the Sumatran, Malayan, Indo-Chinese, South China, Bengal and Siberian tigers so that they have more genetic variation? [ https://www.quora.com/Is-it-a-good-idea-to-interbreed-the-various-endangered-tiger-subspecies-like-the-Sumatran-Malayan-Indo-Chinese-South-China-Bengal-and-Siberian-tigers-so-that-they-have-more-genetic-variation/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to Can giraffes swim? [ https://www.quora.com/Can-giraffes-swim/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to Ecology: What do ecologists think of Lotka-Volterra? [ https://www.quora.com/Ecology-What-do-ecologists-think-of-Lotka-Volterra/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to What is the future of big data in ecology? [ https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-future-of-big-data-in-ecology/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to What is hermatypic coral? [ https://www.quora.com/What-is-hermatypic-coral/answer/Shan-Kothari ] Philosophy * Shan Kothari's answer to Why did Blaise Pascal not immediately understand the "which god" problem with his wager? [ https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Blaise-Pascal-not-immediately-understand-the-which-god-problem-with-his-wager/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to Philosophy of Mind: What is functionalism? [ https://www.quora.com/Philosophy-of-Mind-What-is-functionalism/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to Do ethical philosophers tend to be more ethical? [ https://www.quora.com/Do-ethical-philosophers-tend-to-be-more-ethical/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to Can you be a philosopher and still believe in god? [ https://www.quora.com/Can-you-be-a-philosopher-and-still-believe-in-god/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to What are the main differences between epiphenomenalism and materialist reductionism? [ https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-main-differences-between-epiphenomenalism-and-materialist-reductionism/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to What has philosophy contributed to society in the past 50 years? [ https://www.quora.com/What-has-philosophy-contributed-to-society-in-the-past-50-years/answer/Shan-Kothari ] Other: * Shan Kothari's answer to What are some famous pictures that ruined people's lives? [ https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-famous-pictures-that-ruined-peoples-lives/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to Why is it common liberal policy to reject Social Darwinism despite wholeheartedly embracing evolution? Why this contradiction? [ https://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-common-liberal-policy-to-reject-Social-Darwinism-despite-wholeheartedly-embracing-evolution-Why-this-contradiction/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to Who are the best or most famous Christian poets? [ https://www.quora.com/Who-are-the-best-or-most-famous-Christian-poets/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to What are the most impressive intellectual achievements completed by persons under 20 years old in terms of the influence, magnitude, depth, scope, creativity, or difficulty of the achievement? [ https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-most-impressive-intellectual-achievements-completed-by-persons-under-20-years-old-in-terms-of-the-influence-magnitude-depth-scope-creativity-or-difficulty-of-the-achievement/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to What is it like to attend a REU? [ https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-like-to-attend-a-REU/answer/Shan-Kothari ] * Shan Kothari's answer to What directors chose the same people to work with time and time again, in any roles, and who are these people? [ https://www.quora.com/What-directors-chose-the-same-people-to-work-with-time-and-time-again-in-any-roles-and-who-are-these-people/answer/Shan-Kothari ]

Balaji Viswanathan (பாலாஜி விஸ்வநாதன்)If ever you want to learn something new on daily basis.please switch on the notifications from Balaji Vishwanath sir.Awdhesh Singh (अवधेश सिंह)In case if you are wandering for the best views from an intellect,he is always on cards !Gopalkrishna VishwanathIf ever you wanted a simple answers with so much of life experience,don't forget to follow Gopalkrishna Vishwanath sir!Abhimanyu SoodIf you want to hear a story,please don't miss this guy.. he is my fav!User-9248814863030902883In case if you crave for travel experiences,this guy is fantastic ! Sinless bloke indeed.Sean KernanSarhad ChoudharyIn case if you are eager to know son and grandson of quora ..don't forget these wonderful guys !Vishak RamanIf you want to keep reading and getting lost.he is nice to read! Unique guy I must tell you !Dhawal BarotIf you seem very interested in shortest feel good stories,this guy tops the list!Loy MachedoWhenever you feel low,reading his answers can make you feel better!The list continues !And if ever you want to read some stupid answers follow this guy! Raghavendra MThanks for reading

The Information Technology Act, 2000 came into force on 17.10.2000 vide G.S.R No. 788(E) dated 17.10.2000 and for the first time, a legal definition of “Computer”, “Data”, “electronic record”, “Information” et al were provided. The said Act gave a legal recognition to the electronic records and digital signatures and in Chapter IX thereof provided for penalty and adjudication. Section 43 of the Act interalia provided that in case of unauthorised access, download or copying or damage to data etc, the person responsible shall be liable to pay damages by way of compensation not exceeding one crore rupees to the person affected.Apart from civil liability provided under Section 43, Chapter XI (Sections 63 to 78) of the Act of 2000 provided for criminal liability in cases of Tampering, Hacking, publishing or transmitting obscene material, misrepresentation etc. Apart from the same, Section 72 of the Act provided for penalty in case of bsignNow of confidentiality and privacy and laid that in case any person who has secured access to any electronic record, Data or information, discloses the same to any other person without obtaining the consent of the person concerned, he shall be punished with imprisonment upto two years or with fine upto Rupees one lakh or with both.However, the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 were not adequate and the need for more stringent data protection measures were felt, the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 was enacted which came into force on 27.10.2009. The said Amendment Act brought in the concepts like cyber security in the statute book and widened the scope of digital signatures by replacing the words “electronic signature”. The amendment act also provided for secure electronic signatures and enjoined the central government to prescribe security procedures and practices for securing electronic records and signatures (Sections 15-16) The amendment Act also removed the cap of Rupees One Crore as earlier provided under Section 43 for damage to computer and computer systems and for unauthorised downloading/ copying of data. The said Amendment Act also introduced Section 43A which provides for compensation to be paid in case a body corporate fails to protect the data. Section 46 of the Act prescribes that the person affected has to approach the adjudicating officer appointed under Section 46 of the Act in case the claim for injury or damage does not exceed Rupees Five crores and the civil court in case, the claim exceeds Rupees Five crores. The amendment act also brought/ introduced several new provisions which provide for offenses such as identity theft, receiving stolen computer resource/ device, cheating, violation of privacy, cyber terrorism, pornography (Section 66A-F & 67A-C). The amendment act also brought in provisions directing intermediaries to protect the data/information and penalty has been prescribed for disclosure of information of information in bsignNow of lawful contract (Section 72A)With the enactment of the Amendment Act of 2008, India for the first time got statutory provisions dealing with data protection. However, as the ingredients of “sensitive personal data and information” as well as the “reasonable security practices and procedures” were yet to be prescribed by the Central Government, the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology vide Notification No. GSR 313 (E) dated 11th April 2011 made the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information ) Rules, 2011 (the said rules). Rule 3 of the said rules defines personal sensitive data or information and provides that the same may include information relating to password, financial information such as bank account or credit card details, health condition, medical records etc. Rule 4 enjoins every body corporate which receives or deals with information to provide a privacy policy. Rule 5 prescribes that every body corporate shall obtain consent in writing from the provider of the sensitive information regarding purpose of usage before collection of such information and such body corporate will not collect such information unless it is collected for a lawful purpose connected with the function or activity of such body corporate and collection of such information or data is necessary and once such data is collected, it shall not be retained for a period longer than what is required. Rule 6 provides that disclosure of the information to any third party shall require prior permission from the provider unless such disclosure has been agreed to in the contract between the body corporate and the provider or where the disclosure is necessary for compliance of a legal obligation. The Body corporate has been barred to publish sensitive information and the third parties receiving such information have been barred to disclose it further. Rule 7 lays down that the body corporate may transfer such information to any other body corporate or person in India or outside, that ensure the same level of data protection and such transfer will be allowed only if it is necessary for performance of lawful contract between the body corporate and provider of information or where the provider has consented for data transfer. Rule 8 of the said rules further provide reasonable security practises and procedures and lays down that international standard IS/ISO/IEC 27001 on “Information Technology- Security Techniques- Information Security Management System- requirements “ would be one such standard.The Ministry of Communication and Information Technology further issued a press note dated 24th August 2011 and clarified that the said rules are applicable to the body corporate or any person located within India. The press note further provides that any body corporate providing services relating to collection or handling of sensitive personal data or information under contractual obligation with any other legal entity located within India or outside is not subject to requirements of Rules 5 &6 as mentioned hereinabove. A body corporate providing services to the provider of information under a contractual obligation directly with them however has to comply with Rules 5 &6. The said press note also clarifies that privacy policy mentioned in Rule 4 relates to the body corporate and is not with respect to any particular obligation under the contract. The press note at the end provides that the consent mentioned in Rule 5 includes consent given by any mode of electronic communication.Data Protection relates to issues relating to the collection, storage, accuracy and use of data provided by net users in the use of the World Wide Web. Visitors to any website want their privacy rights to be respected when they engage in e-Commerce. It is part of the confidence-creating role that successful e-Commerce businesses have to convey to the consumer. If industry doesn't make sure it's guarding the privacy of the data it collects, it will be the responsibility of the government and it's their obligation to enact legislation.Any transaction between two or more parties involves an exchange of essential information between the parties. Technological developments have enabled transactions by electronic means. Any such information/data collected by the parties should be used only for the specific purposes for which they were collected. The need arose, to create rights for those who have their data stored and create responsibilities for those who collect, store and process such data. The law relating to the creation of such rights and responsibilities may be referred to as ‘data protection’ law.The world’s first computer specific statute was enacted in the form of a Data Protection Act, in the German state of Hesse, in 1970.The misuse of records under the Nazi regime had raised concerns among the public about the use of computers to store and process large amounts of personal data.The Data Protection Act sought to heal such memories of misuse of information. A different rationale for the introduction of data protection legislation can be seen in the case of Sweden which introduced the first national statute in 1973.Here, data protection was seen as fitting naturally into a two hundred year old system of freedom of information with the concept of subject access (such a right allows an individual to find out what information is held about him) being identified as one of the most important aspects of the legislation.In 1995, the European Union adopted its Directive (95/46/EC) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (hereinafter, the Directive), establishing a detailed privacy regulatory structure. The Directive is specific on the requirements for the transfer of data. It sets down the principles regarding the transfer of data to third countries and states that personal data of EU nationals cannot be sent to countries that do not meet the EU “adequacy” standards with respect to privacy.In order to meet the EU “adequacy” standards, US developed a ‘Safe Harbour’ framework, according to which the US Department of Commerce would maintain a list of US companies that have self-certified to the safe harbor framework. An EU organization can ensure that it is sending information to a U.S. organization participating in the safe harbor by viewing the public list of safe harbor organizations posted on the official website.Data protection has emerged as an important reaction to the development of information technology. In India data protection is covered under the Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter, the Act). The Act defines ‘data’ as, “‘data’ means a representation of information, knowledge, facts, concepts or instructions which are being prepared or have been prepared in a formalized manner, and is intended to be processed, is being processed or has been processed in a computer system or computer network, and may be in any form (including computer printouts magnetic or optical storage media, punched cards, punched tapes) or stored internally in the memory of the computer”. Protection of such data and privacy are covered under specific provisions in the Act. In the recent past, the need for data protection laws has been felt to cater to various needs. The following analyses the position of data protection law with respect to some of the needs.Data Protection Law In Respect of Information Technology Enabled Services (ITES)India started liberalizing its economy in the 1990’s and since then a huge upsurge in the IT business process outsourcing may be witnessed. Financial, educational, legal, marketing, healthcare, telecommunication, banking etc are only some of the services being outsourced into India. This upsurge of outsourcing of ITES into India in the recent past may be attributed to the large English-speaking unemployed populace, cheap labour, enterprising and hardworking nature of the people etc. Statistics have shown that the outsourcing industry is one of the biggest sources of employment. In a span of four years, the number of people working in call centers in the country supporting international industries has risen from 42,000 to 3,50,000. Exports were worth $5.2 billion in 2004-2005 and are expected to grow over 40% this fiscal year. US is currently the biggest investor in Indian ITES, taking advantage of cheap labour costs. Statistics indicate that software engineers with two-years experience in India are being paid about 1/5th of an equivalent US employee.Concerns about adequacy of lawBPO FraudsWith globalization and increasing BPO industry in India, protection of data warrants legislation. There are reasons for this. Every individual consumer of the BPO Industry would expect different levels of privacy from the employees who handle personal data. But there have been situations in the recent past where employees or systems have given away the personal information of customers to third parties without prior consent. So other countries providing BPO business to India expect the Indian government and BPO organizations to take measures for data protection. Countries with data protection law have guidelines that call for data protection law in the country with whom they are transacting.For instance, in, the European Union countries according to the latest guidelines, they will cease to part with data, which are considered the subject matter of protection to any third country unless such other country has a similar law on data protection. One of the essential features of any data protection law would be to prevent the flow of data to non-complying countries and such a provision when implemented may result in a loss of "Data Processing" business to some of the Indian companies.In the recent past, concerns have been raised both within the country as well as by customers abroad regarding the adequacy of data protection and privacy laws in the country. A few incidents have questioned the Indian data protection and privacy standards and have left the outsourcing industry embarrassed. In June 2005, ‘The Sun’ newspaper claimed that one of its journalists bought personal details including passwords, addresses and passport data from a Delhi IT worker for £4.25 each. Earlier BPO frauds in India include New York-based Citibank accounts being looted from a BPO in Pune and a call-center employee in Bangalore peddling credit card information to fraudsters who stole US$398,000 from British bank accounts.UK's Channel 4 TV station ran broadcast footage of a sting operation exposing middlemen hawking the financial data of 200,000 UK citizens. The documentary has prompted Britain's Information Commissioner's Office to examine the security of personal financial data at Indian call centers.In the absence of data protection laws, the kind of work that would be outsourced to India in the future would be limited. The effect of this can be very well seen in the health-care BPO business, which is estimated to be worth close to $45 billion. Lack of data protection laws have left Indian BPO outfits still stagnating in the lower end of the value chain, doing work like billing, insurance claims processing and of course transcription. Besides healthcare, players in the retail financial sector are also affected. Financial offshoring from banks is limited because of statutory compliance requirements and data privacy laws protecting sensitive financial information in accounts. In the Human Resource (HR) domain, there are many restrictions on sharing of personal information. In the medical domain, patient history needs to be protected. In credit card transactions, identity theft could be an issue and needs to be protected. Companies in the banking, financial services and insurance (BFSI) sector and healthcare have excluded applications/processes which use sensitive information from their portfolio for offshoring till they are comfortable about the data protection laws prevalent in the supplier country.Since there is lack of data protection laws in India, Indian BPO outfits are trying to deal with the issue by attempting to adhere to major US and European regulations. MNCs have to comply with foreign Regulations so that they don’t lose on their international partners. There are problems involved in this. Efforts by individual companies may not count for much if companies rule out India as a BPO destination in the first place in the absence of data protection law.Today, the largest portion of BPO work coming to India is low-end call centre and data processing work. If India has to exploit the full potential of the outsourcing opportunity, then we have to move up the value chain. Outsourced work in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)-intensive areas such as clinical research, engineering design and legal research is the way ahead for Indian BPO companies. The move up the value chain cannot happen without stringent laws. Further, weak laws would act as deterrents for FDI, global business and the establishment of research and development parks in the pharmaceutical industry.Looking to the above scenario, we can say that for India to achieve heights in BPO industry stringent laws for data protection and intellectual property rights have to be made. . Thus, a law on data protection on India must address the following Constitutional issues on a "priority basis" before any statutory enactment procedure is set into motion:(1) Privacy rights of interested persons in real space and cyber space.(2) Mandates of freedom of information U/A 19 (1) (a).(3) Mandates of right to know of people at large U/A 21.Once the data protection rules are enforced in India, companies outsourcing to India are unlikely to dismantle the systems they have in place straightaway, and move data more freely to India. Hence ,the need for data protection laws would win over the confidence of international business partners; protect abuse of information; protection of privacy and personal rights of individuals would be ensured; there would be more FDI inflows, global business and the establishment of research and development parks in the pharmaceutical industry & impetus to the sector of e-Commerce at national and international levels would be provided.Data protection law in India (Present status):-Data Protection law in India is included in the Act under specific provisions. Both civil and criminal liabilities are imposed for violation of data protection.(1) Section 43 deals with penalties for damage to computer, computer system etc.(2) Section 65 deals with tampering with computer source documents.(3) Section 66 deals with hacking with computer system.(4) Section 72 deals with penalty for bsignNow of confidentiality and privacy. Call centers can be included in the definition of ‘intermediary’and a ‘network service provider’ and can be penalized under this section.These developments have put the Indian government under pressure to enact more stringent data protection laws in the country in order to protect the lucrative Indian outsourcing industry. In order to use IT as a tool for socio-economic development, employment generation and to consolidate India’s position as a major player in the IT sector,amendments to the IT Act, 2000 have been approved by the cabinet and are due to be tabled in the winter session of the Parliament.Proposed amendments:-The amendments relate to the following[22]:(i) Proposal at Sec. 43 (2) related to handling of sensitive personal data or information with reasonable security practices and procedures.(ii) Gradation of severity of computer related offences under Section 66, committed dishonestly or fraudulently and punishment thereof.(iii) Proposed additional Section 72 (2) for bsignNow of confidentiality with intent to cause injury to a subscriber.It is hoped that these amendments will strengthen the law to suffice the need.Data Protection Laws In Order To Invite ‘Data Controllers’.There has been a strong opinion that if India strengthens its data protection law, it can attract multi-national corporations to India. India can be home to such corporations than a mere supplier of services.In fact, there is an argument that the EU’s data protection law is sufficient to protect the privacy of its people and thus lack of strong protection under Indian law is not a hindrance to the outsourcing industry. To enumerate, consider a company established in EU (called the ‘data controller’) and the supplier of call center services (‘data processor’) in India. If the data processor makes any mistake in the processing of personal data or there are instances of data theft, then the data controller in the EU can be made liable for the consequences. The Indian data processor is not in control of personal data and can only process data under the instructions of the data controller. Thus if a person in EU wants to exercise rights of access and retrieve personal data, the data controller has to retrieve it from the data processor, irrespective of where the data processor is located. Thus a strong data protection law is needed not only to reinforce the image of the Indian outsourcing industry but also to invite multi-national corporations to establish their corporate offices here.Data Protection And TelemarketingIndia is faced with a new phenomenon-telemarketing. This is facilitated, to a large extent, by the widespread use of mobile telephones. Telemarketing executives, now said to be available for as low as US $70 per month, process information about individuals for direct marketing. This interrupts the peace of an individual and conduct of work. There is a violation of privacy caused by such calls who, on behalf of banks, mobile phone companies, financial institutions etc. offer various schemes. The right to privacy has been read into Article 21, Constitution of India, but this has not afforded enough protection. A PIL against several banks and mobile phone service providers is pending before the Supreme Court alleging inter alia that the right to privacy has been infringed.The EC Directive confers certain rights on the people and this includes the right to prevent processing for direct marketing. Thus, a data controller is required not to process information about individuals for direct marketing if an individual asks them not to. So individuals have the right to stop unwanted marketing offers. It would be highly beneficial that data protection law in India also includes such a right to prevent unsolicited marketing offers and protect the privacy of the people.Data Protection With Regard To Governance And PeopleThe Preamble to the Act specifies that, the IT Act 2000, inter alia, will facilitate electronic filing of documents with the Government agencies. It seeks to promote efficient delivery of Government services by means of reliable electronic records. Stringent data protection laws will thus help the Government to protect the interests of its people.Data protection law is necessary to provide protection to the privacy rights of people and to hold cyber criminals responsible for their wrongful acts. Data protection law is not about keeping personal information secret. It is about creating a trusted framework for collection, exchange and use of personal data in commercial and governmental contexts. It is to permit and facilitate the commercial and governmental use of personal data.The Data Security Council of India (DSCI) and Department of Information Technology(DIT) must also rejuvenate its efforts in this regard on the similar lines. However, the best solution can come from good legislative provisions along with suitable public and employee awareness. It is high time that we must pay attention to Data Security in India. Cyber Security in India is missing and the same requires rejuvenation. When even PMO's cyber security is compromised for many months we must at least now wake up. Data bsignNowes and cyber crimes in India cannot be reduced until we make strong cyber laws. We cannot do so by mere declaring a cat as a tiger. Cyber law of India must also be supported by sound cyber security and effective cyber forensics.Indian companies in the IT and BPO sectors handle and have access to all kinds of sensitive and personal data of individuals across the world, including their credit card details, financial information and even their medical history. These Companies store confidential data and information in electronic form and this could be vulnerable in the hands of their employees. It is often misused by unsurplous elements among them. There have been instances of security bsignNowes and data leakages in high profile Indian companies. The recent incidents of data thefts in the BPO industry have raised concerns about data privacy.There is no express legislation in India dealing with data protection. Although the Personal Data Protection Bill was introduced in Parliament in 2006, it is yet to see the light of day. The bill seems to proceed on the general framework of the European Union Data Privacy Directive, 1996. It follows a comprehensive model with the bill aiming to govern the collection, processing and distribution of personal data. It is important to note that the applicability of the bill is limited to ‘personal data’ as defined in Clause 2 of the bill.The bill applies both to government as well as private enterprises engaged in data functions. There is a provision for the appointment of, “Data Controllers”, who have general superintendence and adjudicatory jurisdiction over subjects covered by the bill. It also provides that penal sanctions may be imposed on offenders in addition to compensation for damages to victims.The stringency of data protection law, whether the prevailing law will suffice such needs, whether the proposed amendments are a welcome measure, whether India needs a separate legislation for data protection etc are questions which require an in-depth analysis of the prevailing circumstances and a comparative study with laws of other countries. There is no consensus among the experts regarding these issues. These issues are not in the purview of this write-up. But there can be no doubt about the importance of data protection law in the contemporary IT scenario and are not disputable.

For the benefit of people who don’t have a lot of time to read, I’m going to list a short version of my proposals in bullet points after this paragraph. However, if you have the time, I strongly suggest reading this answer in its entirety because it explains the proposals in fairly granular detail. The proposals are nuanced because gun control is a complicated issue when looked at objectively.Standardize on a process which flags individuals in the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Database for a delay in the background check process when said individuals try to buy a gun. During the three day delay period, the FBI has the opportunity to investigate and take legal action against the individuals if necessary.Create a secure electronic background check system which is available to the public so individuals selling firearms to residents of the same state can know whether it is safe to proceed with a transaction.Require membership in the Civilian Marksmanship Program for the purchase of semiautomatic centerfire weapons and centerfire magazines with more than ten rounds of capacity.Create a national permitting process for carrying concealed handguns which overrides state laws.The Gun Control Act of 1968 mandated that manufacturers and commercial sellers of firearms had to obtain a Federal Firearms License (FFL). This was done under the guise of regulating interstate commerce, trade which crosses state lines. The federal government is generally not allowed to regulate intrastate commerce, trade which remains entirely within a state. In 1994, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act mandated that FFL holders had to perform a background check on any firearm transferred through the FFL to a individual who does not hold an FFL. In 1998, this process was streamlined into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).With that in mind, we’re going to look at how firearms are legally purchased currently so we can have a perspective on potential improvements to the process.When buying a gun through an FFL, buyers must fill out BAFTE form 4473. I strongly recommend readers view the form. Buyers must submit valid photo identification (usually a driver’s license) to the FFL holder to verify their identity and some of the information on their form 4473. There are three categories of firearm which can be bought through a standard FFL dealer: handguns, long guns (rifles and shotguns), and “other firearms”. Buyers must be 18 years of age to buy long guns and 21 years of age to buy handguns from an FFL. “Other firearms” are a weird category which includes receivers for firearms (which is generally the serialized portion of a firearm) or firearms which do not fit the legal definition of a handgun or long gun but are also not regulated by the National Firearms Act. If the “other firearm” can be made into a pistol, the buyer must be 21 years of age. After a buyer has completed their form 4473, the FFL holder calls NICS and relays the completed information to the FBI.Source: (NICS Process in Motion for the Gun Buyer Video Transcript)The FBI runs the information through the NICS database. If the buyer’s provided information has matches within the NICS database, this will generate a “hit”. At the moment, hits include indictments and convictions for felonies, indictments and convictions for domestic violence, indictments and convictions for other crimes which are punishable by one or more years of imprisonment, known fugitives, dishonorable discharges, adjudications which determined an individual to be mentally defective, restraining orders for children or intimate partners, renouncements of citizenship, unlawful users of controlled substances, illegal aliens, and resident aliens who do not meet very specific criteria.If no hits in the NICS database are generated, the FFL is told to “proceed” and the FFL may complete transferring the firearm at the business’s discretion. If the buyer’s provided information generates a hit, the call will be transferred to an FBI employee who will review the information and determine whether the hit matches the rest of the buyer’s provided information. If the hit is valid and the buyer is a prohibited purchaser, the FFL will be told to “deny” the transfer. If the FBI employee determines the hit is invalid, the FFL will be told to “proceed”. If the FBI employee can not immediately determine the validity of a hit, the FFL will be told to “delay” the transfer and the FBI will do more research to determine the validity of a hit. At this point, the FBI is allotted three business days to tell the FFL to “proceed” or “deny”. If those three business days pass without a final judgement, the FFL may proceed with the transfer at their discretion. The system is set up this way so the FBI can not delay a buyer they can not prove is a prohibited possessor of firearms indefinitely, essentially amounting to a denial without due process of law. Nevertheless, some FFL holders maintain a policy of not proceeding with transfers which have do not receive a definite “proceed”; that is the business’s prerogative.If at any point in this process the FFL holder or its employees believes a buyer is purchasing a firearm on behalf of another person, then the FFL will deny the transfer independent of any judgement made by the FBI. Purchasing a firearm on behalf of another person is illegal.Now what about “internet gun sales”?Websites in the business of selling firearms are legally required to acquire an FFL. Since the website which holds an FFL can not visually verify a buyer’s identity, this means the firearms they sell are legally required to be transferred to an FFL near the buyer. At the FFL which facilitates the transfer, the buyer will be required to complete a form 4473 and go through a background check as described above.On auction sites which deal with firearms, buyers and sellers who do not hold FFLs will submit the information of an FFL near each party and arrange for the firearm to be transferred. The seller’s FFL will ship the firearm to the buyer’s FFL and once again the buyer will complete a form 4473 and go through a background check.The final category would be classified websites which allow firearms to be posted for sale. These are essentially the 21st century equivalent of posting a classified advertisement in a newspaper. In these cases, a buyer contacts the seller who posted the advertisement and the two parties enter negotiations. If the buyer and seller legally reside within the same state and are able to meet face to face to conduct a transfer, the firearm in question may be legally bought under federal law without a background check being conducted provided the seller does not have reason to believe the buyer is a prohibited possessor. If any of those conditions are not met, or if state law prohibits intrastate commerce in this fashion, then FFL holders must once again be involved. These conditions apply to all private person to person sales. One noteworthy quirk, under federal law, persons between the ages of 18 and 21 are not prohibited from purchasing a handgun through a private sale. This is in fact one of the very few ways citizens in this age group can exercise their constitutional right to possess handguns.What about gun shows?If a person buys a firearm from an FFL participating in a gun show (this constitutes the majority of firearm sales at gun shows) then a 4473 is filled out as normal. If a person is buying a firearm from a private party, laws regarding private sales apply. Think of gun shows simply as a way for people who might be interested in buying or selling firearms to all be in the same place at the same time. There’s nothing sneaky or tricky about them, they literally happen in convention centers and on fairgrounds. Local police and BATFE agents are always present at gun shows.Now that we have all that basic information out of the way, we can talk about actual changes to federal law.First let’s take a look at prohibiting suspected terrorists from purchasing firearms. We can all agree we hate terrorists, but they still have due process rights. Fortunately, the FBI is in charge of both the Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) and the NICS database. Prospective gun buyers with records that produce a match in the TSDB could generate a hit in the NICS database. The FBI could then investigate the hit and, assuming the hit actually matched the buyer in question, determine whether or not to tell the FFL to delay the transfer. Within the current three day delay window, the FBI could bring the case before a judge. Should the judge find probable cause, the transfer could be legally halted. At this point the buyer should be notified and be interviewed as part of the investigation. If charges are appropriate, the FBI can file charges in a timely manner. Otherwise, the suspect should be allowed to go about their business without further interference. That puts a lot of burden on the FBI, but it isn’t supposed to be easy to legally strip citizens’ rights in the United States. Remember, the burden of proof always lies upon the accuser, not the defendant.One rather common gun control proposal in the United States is that of universal background checks on all firearm sales, including private intrastate sales. On a practical level, compliance and enforcement of a universal background check would be very difficult without some kind of national firearm registry linking specific firearms to their owners. No national firearm registry exists for regular rifles, shotguns, or pistols at the moment and it’s actually illegal to create one because of the Firearm Owners Protection Act passed in 1986. There remains a visceral fear of a firearms registry among many conservatives; the concerned parties believe that all firearm registries are nothing more than a precursor to the total confiscation of all firearms. This belief is objectively refuted because numerous firearm registries in multiple US states and democratic countries as well as a national registry on firearms regulated by the National Firearms Act exist and have not been precursors to a total confiscation of all firearms. However, many conservatives latch onto the words of a select handful of extremist politicians who espouse a desire for confiscation as proof that confiscation is the inevitable result of all registries.With all that being said, what might be feasible as an alternative to a universal background check is creating an online version of form 4473 so the public could voluntarily conduct background checks without going to an FFL. This is actually something most gun owners want because, at the moment, there’s no way of conducting a background check for a private intrastate sale in most states without involving an FFL. Involving an FFL introduces a financial disincentive because FFLs are businesses and usually charge for their services. I’ll propose the best system I’ve thought of so far which allows for minimal fraud and abuse.First, create a secure electronic variant of the 4473. It should include the buyer and seller information along with contact information for both parties. Once the form is completed, a unique confirmation number is sent out to both parties using the provided contact information. Both parties enter their confirmation numbers, then the form is submitted to the FBI and run through the NICS database. A single transaction number is generated for the NICS check and provided to the buyer and seller. The parties then call a phone number for a NICS automated line and enter the transaction number along with their unique confirmation numbers. This transfers the call to a live operator who examines the results of the NICS check performed for the transaction. The operator then tells the seller to “proceed”, “delay”, or “deny” just as they would with an FFL.The idea behind the whole system is that it allows for an effective background check to be done while offering a reasonable measure of privacy for the buyer. Sure, somebody could abuse the system if they wanted to put in enough effort, but they wouldn’t get very much information. It also removes a financial disincentive; it only costs individuals time to do a check like this and the check and be performed virtually anywhere, not just at FFL locations.Now, let’s discuss assault weapons and magazines which hold more than ten rounds. The problem with the Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 was that it didn’t do anything except drive up prices on the magazines and weapons described by the ban. There was no measurable impact on crime during the ten years the Assault Weapons Ban was in effect.Here is how assault weapons were defined in 1994:Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:Folding or telescoping stockPistol gripBayonet mountFlash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate oneGrenade launcher mountSemi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:Magazine that attaches outside the pistol gripThreaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressorBarrel shroud safety feature that prevents burns to the operatorUnloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or moreA semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:Folding or telescoping stockPistol gripDetachable magazine.All of those things are cosmetic features that can be designed around. In fact, they frequently were and are designed around. Even today in states with more stringent feature based assault weapon bans, like California, there exist so called “featureless” firearms which are perfectly legal and not objectively worse for killing people than assault weapons. Now we could try an assault weapon ban again and again have no impact on crime… or we could recognize that semiautomatic centerfire weapons are undeniably the arms of choice in a militia. Police and military forces all over the world use semiautomatic (or fully automatic) centerfire weapons almost exclusively. As such, it makes more sense to more stringently regulate all semiautomatic centerfire weapons, not just a certain subset with specific cosmetic features. At the same time, we can breathe new life into the militia concept described by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, even make the militia well regulated.In the United States, we currently have an organization called the Civilian Marksmanship Program, a federally chartered corporation whose purpose is:To instruct citizens of the United States in marksmanship;To promote practice and safety in the use of firearms;To conduct competitions in the use of firearms and to award trophies, prizes, badges, and other insignia to competitors.Among numerous other things, the CMP sells M1 Garand rifles. The Garand is a .30–06 semiautomatic battle rifle roughly twice as powerful as common AR-15 or Kalashnikov rifles. The Garand was the primary infantry rifle of the US military during the Second World War and the Korean War. The CMP literally sells them so people can practice target shooting with a weapon of war.Image by Curiosandrelics - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, File:M1-Garand-Rifle.jpg - Wikimedia CommonsLet’s take a look at eligibility requirements for the CMP:REQUIREMENTS FOR PURCHASEBy law, the CMP can sell surplus military firearms, ammunition, parts and other items only to members of CMP affiliated clubs who are also U.S. citizens, over 18 years of age and who are legally eligible to purchase a firearm.PROOF OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP:You must provide a copy of a U.S. birth certificate, passport, proof of naturalization, or any official government document (When using a military ID to prove citizenship, must be an E5 or above) that shows birth in the U.S. or states citizenship as U.S.PROOF OF AGE:You must provide proof of age. Usually proof of citizenship also provides proof of age. In those cases where it may not, a driver’s license is sufficient.MEMBERSHIP IN CMP AFFILIATED ORGANIZATION:You must provide a copy of your current membership card or other proof of membership. This requirement cannot be waived. The CMP currently has over 2,000 affiliated organizations located in many parts of the country. CMP Club Member Certification Form- If your CMP affiliated club does not issue individual membership cards, please have the club fill out the CMP Club Member Certification Form and return it with your order.Membership in many of these organizations costs $25.00 or less and can be accomplished online. A listing of affiliated organizations can be found by clicking on our Club Search web page at http://ct.thecmp.org/app/v1/inde.... If you have any difficulty in locating a club, please contact the CMP at 256-835-8455 or by emailing CMP Customer Service. We will find one for you. In addition to shooting clubs, the CMP also has several special affiliates. Membership in these organizations satisfies our requirement for purchase. These special affiliates include: Congressionally chartered veterans' organizations such as the VFW, AL, DAV, MCL, etc. U.S. Military services (active or reserves), National Guard, to include retirees. Professional 501(c)3 law enforcement organizations and associations such as the FOP, NAPO, NSA, etc. The Garand Collector's Association is a CMP Affiliated Club. You can download a Garand Collector's Association Application Form.Note: Club membership IS required for purchase of rifles, parts, and ammunition.Club membership is NOT required for instructional publications or videos or CMP memorabilia.MARKSMANSHIP OR OTHER FIREARMS RELATED ACTIVITY:You must provide proof of participation in a marksmanship related activity or otherwise show familiarity with the safe handling of firearms and range procedures. Your marksmanship related activity does not have to be with highpower rifles; it can be with smallbore rifles, pistols, air guns or shotguns. Proof of marksmanship participation can be provided by documenting any of the following:Current or past military service.Current or past law enforcement serviceParticipation in a rifle, pistol, air gun or shotgun competition (provide copy of results bulletin).Completion of a marksmanship clinic that included live fire training (provide a copy of the certificate of completion or a statement from the instructor).Distinguished, Instructor, or Coach status.Concealed Carry License.Firearms Owner Identification Cards that included live fire training. - FFL or C&R license.Completion of a Hunter Safety Course that included live fire training.Certification from range or club official or law enforcement officer witnessing shooting activity. Complete the CMP Marksmanship Form to signNow your range firing and the required marksmanship related activity for an individual to purchase from the CMP.No proof of marksmanship required if over age 60. Proof of club membership and citizenship required for all ages. NOTE: Proof of marksmanship activity is not required for purchase of ammunition, parts, publications or memorabilia.BE LEGALLY ELIGIBLE TO PURCHASE A FIREARM:The information you supply on your application will be submitted by the CMP to the FBI National Instant Criminal Check System (NICS) to verify you are not prohibited by Federal, State or Local law from acquiring or possessing a rifle. Your signature on the Purchaser Certification portion of the purchase application authorizes the CMP to initiate the NICS check and authorizes the FBI to inform CMP of the result. IMPORTANT: If your State or locality requires you to first obtain a license, permit, or Firearms Owner ID card in order to possess or receive a rifle, you must enclose a photocopy of your license, permit, or card with the application for purchase.As you can see, the CMP eligibility process is quite a bit more involved than the background check system we have now. It seems to have worked for keeping the powerful semiautomatic Garand rifles out of the hands of mass murderers. The last mass shooting on US soil that I know of which involved an M1 Garand was the Kent State massacre and that involved the Ohio National Guard shooting anti-war protesters, not civilians who were sold rifles through the CMP. I haven’t been able to find any records of crimes committed with guns sold through the CMP. I’m sure it has happened at one point in time or another, but the occurrence is so rare that there hasn’t been any documentation. My point is that the CMP has a really great track record in the United States for making sure guns don’t go to bad guys.Since the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 didn’t have any measurable impacts on crime and the CMP has great results, I propose we extend the CMP eligibility requirements to all semiautomatic centerfire firearms and centerfire magazines with more than ten rounds of capacity. This means only people who meet the listed criteria will be able to buy the types of weapons most useful in a militia which are also the weapons we primarily see used in mass shootings from an FFL. The proposal also effectively introduces a mandatory training and basic competency requirement before individuals can purchase semiautomatic centerfire weapons from a gun store. The inclusion of CMP eligibility for the purchase of centerfire magazine over ten rounds creates a strong incentive for existing gun owners and individuals who purchase firearms through private intrastate sales to get training and join the CMP if they want easy access to centerfire magazines over ten rounds.The word centerfire is really important because there is another class of firearms which use rimfire cartridges.A collection of rimfire and centerfire cartridges, left to right: .22lr (rimfire), .22WMR (rimfire), .357 magnum (centerfire), .30–06 Springfield (centerfire), 12 gauge shotshell (centerfire)Rimfire cartridges aren’t very powerful; they’re mostly used for small game hunting and target shooting. Most countries allow ownership of semiautomatic rimfire rifles with only basic licensing; countries like Canada and the UK don’t even have restrictions on magazine capacity for rimfire rifles. Could they be used by a mass shooter? Sure, anything could, but semiautomatic rimfire firearms just aren’t a threat compared to semiautomatic centerfire firearms or even non-semiautomatic centerfire firearms. Wounds caused by bullets fired from rimfire cartridges are almost always less severe than wounds caused by bullets fired from centerfire cartridges. Very precise shot placement is required for rimfire weapons to instantly kill a person and mass shooters are unlikely to take the time to precisely place their shots.Seen above are four rimfire rifles made by Marlin.Regulating firearms in this way allows new gun owners to hunt, shoot targets, and defend themselves using semiautomatic rimfire or manually operated firearms. If new gun owners want easy access to semiautomatic centerfire firearms which are useful in a militia context, they can join the CMP, effectively becoming a member of a well regulated militia, after demonstrating themselves to be competent and well trained.I have some final thoughts on the CMP related proposal before moving on to the next topic. CMP eligibility introduces additional layers of human interaction between people and semiautomatic centerfire weapons and centerfire magazines over ten rounds. Barring major advances in mental healthcare and adjudication in the United States, layers of human interaction are the best way for red flags to be raised about somebody who might want to kill large numbers of people with a firearm. Additional layers of human interaction also introduce a larger hurdle for straw purchasers, people who buy firearms for people who can’t pass background checks because they’re ineligible to own firearms. Additional layers of human interaction make law enforcement investigations slightly easier as well.At the moment, laws, standards, and permits for carrying concealed handguns vary wildly. Some states have no requirements while other states functionally don’t allow anybody except police officers to carry handguns in any way. While the percentage of the US population which actually carries handguns regularly, concealed or openly, is relatively small, those who do carry handguns regularly can often face great legal peril for no particularly good reason when crossing state lines. At the same time, it would be good for the public to know that people carrying concealed handguns are actually competent and not a hazard to the public. In essence, a balance would be preferable to the extremes which currently exist.I propose creating an national permit for carrying concealed handguns in any state. Police officers already enjoy something similar to this. The permitting process should include a standardized class which can be taught by police officers or other qualified instructors. Before attending the class, applicants should undergo a background check. Among other things, the class should cover the legal use of deadly force, safe firearms handling practices, and conflict deescalation practices. Then applicants should be given a written test on the subjects. If the applicants pass, they should then undergo a practical handgun handling and shooting competency test. If applicants are able to both handle handguns safely and shoot accurately, they will then be issued a carry permit which is valid for a certain number of years; three to five years seems reasonable. If applicants fail either test then they go home without a permit and can retake the whole class the next time it is offered if they still wish to carry a concealed handgun.

We’re going to examine homicide statistics in the United States from 2010 to 2014. It’s a recent five year span which should be proportionately representative of the present and the period doesn’t contain any particularly large statistical anomalies. In this context, it’s important to note that murder is specifically defined as the willful, unlawful killing of another person. Murder is distinct from justifiable homicide which involves the willful, lawful killing of a felon by a law enforcement officer or private citizen.[1]Seen below is a table showing the number of murders in the United States categorized by weapon:Image by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Expanded Homicide Data Table 8)One of the striking things about those statistics is the disproportionately large number of murders committed using handguns. That number is consistently more than twice that of every other single category of weapon and every other category of firearm combined (even assuming the category “Firearms, type not stated” excluded all handguns, which it most certainly does not).The disproportionate use of handguns in murders isn’t unique to the United States either. In most nations where handguns are in widespread circulation, they are the weapon of choice in murders. In most nations where handguns are not in widespread circulation, knives are the weapon of choice in murders. The prevalence of both handguns and knives as murder weapons can be reasonably assumed to be the result of both weapon types being convenient and easily accessible during an argument or concealable enough to allow a murderer to get fairly close to a victim. This assumption is reasonably well supported by the available data outlining the circumstances of murders.[2] However, an important difference between knives and handguns is that knife attacks are substantially less likely to result in a fatality than attacks using handguns. It’s also much easier to block or run away from a knife than a handgun.Things get even more interesting though when we look at justifiable homicide data.Image by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Expanded Homicide Data Table 14)Image by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Expanded Homicide Data Table 15)The numbers for law enforcement aren’t especially surprising because virtually every officer in the United States carries a handgun on a daily basis. It makes perfect sense that the bulk of justifiable homicides by law enforcement officers are performed using handguns. Likewise, it’s not surprising that the bulk of justifiable homicides by private citizens are performed using handguns given the prevalence and convenience of handguns. What is surprising is just how few justifiable homicides happen in comparison to murders. It would seem the common narrative that good guys with guns frequently kill bad guys with guns is grossly overamplified by proponents for gun ownership.However, it can be said with accuracy that many self defense cases involving guns do not end in a justifiable homicide. Unfortunately, there is no solid statistical data on just how many people defend themselves with guns every year. Research conducted by organizations biased towards gun ownership consistently use statistically unsound methods which result in estimates of multiple millions of defensive gun uses each year. Research conducted by organizations which use statistically sound methods results in yearly estimates in the 60,000–80,000 range, but the scope of the research may be too narrow and therefore omit a statistically signNow number of defensive gun incidents.What good statistical data is available for is the number of robberies and aggravated assaults involving firearms. There are consistently around 120,000 robberies involving firearms every year and usually over 140,000 aggravated assaults involving firearms every year. Although the firearms used in these robberies and aggravated assaults are not broken down by type, there’s no reason to believe that the distribution would appear signNowly different than that seen in homicide. In other words, it seems most likely that the type of firearm most commonly seen in these non-fatal violent crimes is a handgun.Image by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Table 15)Image by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Table 15)Regardless of the statistical frequency of non-lethal defensive gun use, it is readily apparent to me that the illegal use of handguns is a signNow problem in the United States.Furthermore, it’s my experience that handguns are categorically the worst defensive firearms available. The problem isn’t that they can’t make holes that incapacitate people, they’re all clearly quite capable of that. The problem is that handguns are extraordinarily difficult for most people to shoot accurately in any conditions which remotely resemble a lethal confrontation because handguns can only be aimed using a single point of contact, the grip. It requires an asinine level of training to become competent in shooting a pistol under stress.By contrast, long guns, rifles and shotguns, can be shot much more accurately because the user can hold on to the grip with their firing hand, plant the buttstock against their firing shoulder, and stabilize the long gun with their non-firing hand by holding on to the forend. Those three points of contact make it quite possible for relatively new users to accurately shoot long guns with relatively little training and press long guns into defensively usage easily.So when people advocate for handguns as defensive weapons, I become highly skeptical about the credibility of those claims. The only things handguns are good at are being compact and convenient. Long guns are superior in every other way. In military combat where handguns and long guns are both convenient and available, you will always find that long guns are the cause of nearly all non-explosive related casualties and handguns cause so few casualties that they’re almost not statistically signNow. Handgun accuracy among law enforcement officers, people ostensibly trained and competent in the use of handguns, is statistically abysmal. Essentially what I’m saying is that the reverence for handguns in the United States is severely misplaced and not grounded in reality.So what should be done about handguns in the United States?If you look at the weapons regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934, the list is perplexing without historical context. Placing controls on machine guns makes sense from a public safety standpoint because machine guns fire immense volumes of bullets in a short period of time. Regulating silencers seems like an obvious attempt to prevent gunshots from going unnoticed when guns are fired illegally. Meanwhile, somewhat concealable firearms like short barreled rifles and shotguns have regulations placed on them while even more concealable handguns are unregulated.If you read through the 1934 congressional hearings on the National Firearms Act (NFA),[3] you’ll find that handguns were very much intended to be regulated in a similar manner to short barreled shotguns in the original legislation. Interestingly, when asked about dropping pistols from the NFA in favor of increased regulations on machine guns or sawed-off shotguns, the Attorney General of the United States in his testimony explicitly warned “I think it would be a terrible mistake to adopt any half-way measures about this. I think the sooner we get to the point where we are prepared to recognize the fact that the possession of deadly weapons must be regulated and checked, the better off we are going to be as a people.” In the end though, handguns weren’t regulated by the NFA. I happen to think that statistics have proven the Attorney General correct some 84 years later.At this point, I very much believe that handguns can and should be regulated like short barreled shotguns under the NFA. I believe that one of the major problems with various incarnations of the “Assault Weapons Ban” is that said laws are inherently not retroactive and do nothing about existing weapons. This is not the case in regards to guns regulated by the NFA; all firearms described by the NFA, with the exception of antiques, must be registered with the federal government.In order to come into possession of an NFA firearm, normally an individualmust obtain approval from the ATF, pass an extensive background check to include submitting a photograph and fingerprints, fully register the firearm, receive ATF written permission before moving the firearm across state lines, and pay a tax.[4]Although legislating that existing handgun owners must register their handguns under the NFA sounds complex, it really isn’t and our existing legal code is already set up for adding new classes of firearms to the National Firearms Act with nothing more than simple legislation. The following provisions are buried within the Internal Revenue Code:[5]Section 207 of Pub. L. 90–618, as amended by Pub. L. 99–514, §2, Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2095, provided that:“(a) Section 201 of this title [enacting this chapter] shall take effect on the first day of the first month following the month in which it is enacted [October 1968].“(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) or any other provision of law, any person possessing a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 [formerly I.R.C. 1954] (as amended by this title) which is not registered to him in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record shall register each firearm so possessed with the Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate in such form and manner as the Secretary or his delegate may require within the thirty days immediately following the effective date of section 201 of this Act [see subsec. (a) of this section]. Such registrations shall become a part of the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record required to be maintained by section 5841 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as amended by this title). No information or evidence required to be submitted or retained by a natural person to register a firearm under this section shall be used, directly or indirectly, as evidence against such person in any criminal proceeding with respect to a prior or concurrent violation of law.“(c) The amendments made by sections 202 through 206 of this title [amending sections 6806 and 7273 of this title, repealing sections 5692 and 6107 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as a note under this section] shall take effect on the date of enactment [Oct. 22, 1968].“(d) The Secretary of the Treasury, after publication in the Federal Register of his intention to do so, is authorized to establish such period of amnesty, not to exceed ninety days in the case of any single period, and immunity from liability during any such period, as the Secretary determines will contribute to the purposes of this title [adding this chapter, and sections 6806 and 7273 of this title, repealing sections 5692 and 6107 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes under this section].”This means that the Secretary of the Treasury can at any time authorize an amnesty period in which owners of unregistered (read as illegally possessed) NFA firearms can register those firearms and never be prosecuted for anything related to those firearms. Additionally, while normal NFA registrations require a $200 tax, there is no requirement for a tax to be imposed on amnesty registrations, so there is no legally mandated financial disincentive. Although there hasn’t been an amnesty since 1968, the last one was implemented for the purposes of getting war trophy machine guns registered and was wildly successful. Everybody who registered their previously illegal (and in some cases outright stolen) machine gun got to keep their registered gun and the government got to know where more machine guns were to help with record keeping.There are several effects that regulating handguns under the NFA would have:Everybody who isn’t irrationally paranoid about the federal government confiscating guns would register during the amnesty period and be fine.People who are irrationally paranoid about the federal government confiscating guns and refuse to register could be prosecuted for NFA violations piecemeal as they became noticed.Straw purchases for new handguns would virtually disappear because NFA requirements are signNowly more stringent than normal and link specific people to specific guns. Straw purchases are cases in which people buy guns for other people who can’t pass a background check.The black market for handguns will shrink and prices for black market handguns will rise as handguns are inevitably removed from circulation and fewer handguns flow into the black market as replacements due to a severe reduction in straw purchases.If future executives and lawmakers actually wanted to keep handgun buying constituents happy, those executives and lawmakers would have to properly and adequately fund the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives if they wanted the NFA approval process to work in a timely manner. This would have the additional positive side effect of allowing the BATFE to better enforce all laws instead of being hamstrung by wholly inadequate funding. Finally, since NFA regulation has historically proven to decrease the frequency in which regulated firearms are used in crime, it is reasonable to assume that the frequency of handgun usage in criminal activity would decrease over time.Although I don’t think regulating handguns in this manner would see popular support, there are several regulations which I do think would see popular support.The Gun Control Act of 1968 mandated that manufacturers and commercial sellers of firearms had to obtain a Federal Firearms License (FFL). This was done under the guise of regulating interstate commerce, trade which crosses state lines. The federal government is generally not allowed to regulate intrastate commerce, trade which remains entirely within a state. In 1994, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act mandated that FFL holders had to perform a background check on any firearm transferred through the FFL to a individual who does not hold an FFL. In 1998, this process was streamlined into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).With that in mind, we’re going to look at how firearms are legally purchased currently so we can have a perspective on potential improvements to the process.When buying a gun through an FFL, buyers must fill out BAFTE form 4473. I strongly recommend readers view the form. Buyers must submit valid photo identification (usually a driver’s license) to the FFL holder to verify their identity and some of the information on their form 4473. There are three categories of firearm which can be bought through a standard FFL dealer: handguns, long guns (rifles and shotguns), and “other firearms”. Buyers must be 18 years of age to buy long guns and 21 years of age to buy handguns from an FFL. “Other firearms” are a weird category which includes receivers for firearms (which is generally the serialized portion of a firearm) or firearms which do not fit the legal definition of a handgun or long gun but are also not regulated by the National Firearms Act. If the “other firearm” can be made into a pistol, the buyer must be 21 years of age. After a buyer has completed their form 4473, the FFL holder calls NICS and relays the completed information to the FBI.Source: (NICS Process in Motion for the Gun Buyer Video Transcript)The FBI runs the information through the NICS database. If the buyer’s provided information has matches within the NICS database, this will generate a “hit”. At the moment, hits include indictments and convictions for felonies, indictments and convictions for domestic violence, indictments and convictions for other crimes which are punishable by one or more years of imprisonment, known fugitives, dishonorable discharges, adjudications which determined an individual to be mentally defective, restraining orders for children or intimate partners, renouncements of citizenship, unlawful users of controlled substances, illegal aliens, and resident aliens who do not meet very specific criteria.If no hits in the NICS database are generated, the FFL is told to “proceed” and the FFL may complete transferring the firearm at the business’s discretion. If the buyer’s provided information generates a hit, the call will be transferred to an FBI employee who will review the information and determine whether the hit matches the rest of the buyer’s provided information. If the hit is valid and the buyer is a prohibited purchaser, the FFL will be told to “deny” the transfer. If the FBI employee determines the hit is invalid, the FFL will be told to “proceed”. If the FBI employee can not immediately determine the validity of a hit, the FFL will be told to “delay” the transfer and the FBI will do more research to determine the validity of a hit. At this point, the FBI is allotted three business days to tell the FFL to “proceed” or “deny”. If those three business days pass without a final judgement, the FFL may proceed with the transfer at their discretion. The system is set up this way so the FBI can not delay a buyer they can not prove is a prohibited possessor of firearms indefinitely, essentially amounting to a denial without due process of law. Nevertheless, some FFL holders maintain a policy of not proceeding with transfers which have do not receive a definite “proceed”; that is the business’s prerogative.If at any point in this process the FFL holder or its employees believes a buyer is purchasing a firearm on behalf of another person, then the FFL will deny the transfer independent of any judgement made by the FBI. Purchasing a firearm on behalf of another person is illegal.Now what about “internet gun sales”?Websites in the business of selling firearms are legally required to acquire an FFL. Since the website which holds an FFL can not visually verify a buyer’s identity, this means the firearms they sell are legally required to be transferred to an FFL near the buyer. At the FFL which facilitates the transfer, the buyer will be required to complete a form 4473 and go through a background check as described above.On auction sites which deal with firearms, buyers and sellers who do not hold FFLs will submit the information of an FFL near each party and arrange for the firearm to be transferred. The seller’s FFL will ship the firearm to the buyer’s FFL and once again the buyer will complete a form 4473 and go through a background check.The final category would be classified websites which allow firearms to be posted for sale. These are essentially the 21st century equivalent of posting a classified advertisement in a newspaper. In these cases, a buyer contacts the seller who posted the advertisement and the two parties enter negotiations. If the buyer and seller legally reside within the same state and are able to meet face to face to conduct a transfer, the firearm in question may be legally bought under federal law without a background check being conducted provided the seller does not have reason to believe the buyer is a prohibited possessor. If any of those conditions are not met, or if state law prohibits intrastate commerce in this fashion, then FFL holders must once again be involved. These conditions apply to all private person to person sales. One noteworthy quirk, under federal law, persons between the ages of 18 and 21 are not prohibited from purchasing a handgun through a private sale. This is in fact one of the very few ways citizens in this age group can exercise their constitutional right to possess handguns.What about gun shows?If a person buys a firearm from an FFL participating in a gun show (this constitutes the majority of firearm sales at gun shows) then a 4473 is filled out as normal. If a person is buying a firearm from a private party, laws regarding private sales apply. Think of gun shows simply as a way for people who might be interested in buying or selling firearms to all be in the same place at the same time. There’s nothing sneaky or tricky about them, they literally happen in convention centers and on fairgrounds. Local police and BATFE agents are always present at gun shows.Now that we have all that basic information out of the way, we can talk about actual changes to federal law.First let’s take a look at prohibiting suspected terrorists from purchasing firearms. We can all agree we hate terrorists, but they still have due process rights. Fortunately, the FBI is in charge of both the Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) and the NICS database. Prospective gun buyers with records that produce a match in the TSDB could generate a hit in the NICS database. The FBI could then investigate the hit and, assuming the hit actually matched the buyer in question, determine whether or not to tell the FFL to delay the transfer. Within the current three day delay window, the FBI could bring the case before a judge. Should the judge find probable cause, the transfer could be legally halted. At this point the buyer should be notified and be interviewed as part of the investigation. If charges are appropriate, the FBI can file charges in a timely manner. Otherwise, the suspect should be allowed to go about their business without further interference. That puts a lot of burden on the FBI, but it isn’t supposed to be easy to legally strip citizens’ rights in the United States. Remember, the burden of proof always lies upon the accuser, not the defendant.One rather common gun control proposal in the United States is that of universal background checks on all firearm sales, including private intrastate sales. On a practical level, compliance and enforcement of a universal background check would be very difficult without some kind of national firearm registry linking specific firearms to their owners. No national firearm registry exists for regular rifles, shotguns, or pistols at the moment and it’s actually illegal to create one because of the Firearm Owners Protection Act passed in 1986. There remains a visceral fear of a firearms registry among many conservatives; the concerned parties believe that all firearm registries are nothing more than a precursor to the total confiscation of all firearms. This belief is objectively refuted because numerous firearm registries in multiple US states and democratic countries as well as a national registry on firearms regulated by the National Firearms Act exist and have not been precursors to a total confiscation of all firearms. However, many conservatives latch onto the words of a select handful of extremist politicians who espouse a desire for confiscation as proof that confiscation is the inevitable result of all registries.With all that being said, what might be feasible as an alternative to a universal background check is creating an online version of form 4473 so the public could voluntarily conduct background checks without going to an FFL. This is actually something most gun owners want because, at the moment, there’s no way of conducting a background check for a private intrastate sale in most states without involving an FFL. Involving an FFL introduces a financial disincentive because FFLs are businesses and usually charge for their services. I’ll propose the best system I’ve thought of so far which allows for minimal fraud and abuse.First, create a secure electronic variant of the 4473. It should include the buyer and seller information along with contact information for both parties. Once the form is completed, a unique confirmation number is sent out to both parties using the provided contact information. Both parties enter their confirmation numbers, then the form is submitted to the FBI and run through the NICS database. A single transaction number is generated for the NICS check and provided to the buyer and seller. The parties then call a phone number for a NICS automated line and enter the transaction number along with their unique confirmation numbers. This transfers the call to a live operator who examines the results of the NICS check performed for the transaction. The operator then tells the seller to “proceed”, “delay”, or “deny” just as they would with an FFL.The idea behind the whole system is that it allows for an effective background check to be done while offering a reasonable measure of privacy for the buyer. Sure, somebody could abuse the system if they wanted to put in enough effort, but they wouldn’t get very much information. It also removes a financial disincentive; it only costs individuals time to do a check like this and the check and be performed virtually anywhere, not just at FFL locations.Now, let’s discuss assault weapons and magazines which hold more than ten rounds. The problem with the Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 was that it didn’t do anything except drive up prices on the magazines and weapons described by the ban. There was no measurable impact on crime during the ten years the Assault Weapons Ban was in effect.Here is how assault weapons were defined in 1994:Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:Folding or telescoping stockPistol gripBayonet mountFlash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate oneGrenade launcher mountSemi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:Magazine that attaches outside the pistol gripThreaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressorBarrel shroud safety feature that prevents burns to the operatorUnloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or moreA semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:Folding or telescoping stockPistol gripDetachable magazine.All of those things are cosmetic features that can be designed around. In fact, they frequently were and are designed around. Even today in states with more stringent feature based assault weapon bans, like California, there exist so called “featureless” firearms which are perfectly legal and not objectively worse for killing people than assault weapons. Now we could try an assault weapon ban again and again have no impact on crime… or we could recognize that semiautomatic centerfire weapons are undeniably the arms of choice in a militia. Police and military forces all over the world use semiautomatic (or fully automatic) centerfire weapons almost exclusively. As such, it makes more sense to more stringently regulate all semiautomatic centerfire weapons, not just a certain subset with specific cosmetic features. At the same time, we can breathe new life into the militia concept described by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, even make the militia well regulated.In the United States, we currently have an organization called the Civilian Marksmanship Program, a federally chartered corporation whose purpose is:To instruct citizens of the United States in marksmanship;To promote practice and safety in the use of firearms;To conduct competitions in the use of firearms and to award trophies, prizes, badges, and other insignia to competitors.Among numerous other things, the CMP sells M1 Garand rifles. The Garand is a .30–06 semiautomatic battle rifle roughly twice as powerful as common AR-15 or Kalashnikov rifles. The Garand was the primary infantry rifle of the US military during the Second World War and the Korean War. The CMP literally sells them so people can practice target shooting with a weapon of war.Image by Curiosandrelics - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, File:M1-Garand-Rifle.jpg - Wikimedia CommonsLet’s take a look at eligibility requirements for the CMP:REQUIREMENTS FOR PURCHASEBy law, the CMP can sell surplus military firearms, ammunition, parts and other items only to members of CMP affiliated clubs who are also U.S. citizens, over 18 years of age and who are legally eligible to purchase a firearm.PROOF OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP:You must provide a copy of a U.S. birth certificate, passport, proof of naturalization, or any official government document (When using a military ID to prove citizenship, must be an E5 or above) that shows birth in the U.S. or states citizenship as U.S.PROOF OF AGE:You must provide proof of age. Usually proof of citizenship also provides proof of age. In those cases where it may not, a driver’s license is sufficient.MEMBERSHIP IN CMP AFFILIATED ORGANIZATION:You must provide a copy of your current membership card or other proof of membership. This requirement cannot be waived. The CMP currently has over 2,000 affiliated organizations located in many parts of the country. CMP Club Member Certification Form- If your CMP affiliated club does not issue individual membership cards, please have the club fill out the CMP Club Member Certification Form and return it with your order.Membership in many of these organizations costs $25.00 or less and can be accomplished online. A listing of affiliated organizations can be found by clicking on our Club Search web page at http://ct.thecmp.org/app/v1/inde.... If you have any difficulty in locating a club, please contact the CMP at 256-835-8455 or by emailing CMP Customer Service. We will find one for you. In addition to shooting clubs, the CMP also has several special affiliates. Membership in these organizations satisfies our requirement for purchase. These special affiliates include: Congressionally chartered veterans' organizations such as the VFW, AL, DAV, MCL, etc. U.S. Military services (active or reserves), National Guard, to include retirees. Professional 501(c)3 law enforcement organizations and associations such as the FOP, NAPO, NSA, etc. The Garand Collector's Association is a CMP Affiliated Club. You can download a Garand Collector's Association Application Form.Note: Club membership IS required for purchase of rifles, parts, and ammunition.Club membership is NOT required for instructional publications or videos or CMP memorabilia.MARKSMANSHIP OR OTHER FIREARMS RELATED ACTIVITY:You must provide proof of participation in a marksmanship related activity or otherwise show familiarity with the safe handling of firearms and range procedures. Your marksmanship related activity does not have to be with highpower rifles; it can be with smallbore rifles, pistols, air guns or shotguns. Proof of marksmanship participation can be provided by documenting any of the following:Current or past military service.Current or past law enforcement serviceParticipation in a rifle, pistol, air gun or shotgun competition (provide copy of results bulletin).Completion of a marksmanship clinic that included live fire training (provide a copy of the certificate of completion or a statement from the instructor).Distinguished, Instructor, or Coach status.Concealed Carry License.Firearms Owner Identification Cards that included live fire training. - FFL or C&R license.Completion of a Hunter Safety Course that included live fire training.Certification from range or club official or law enforcement officer witnessing shooting activity. Complete the CMP Marksmanship Form to signNow your range firing and the required marksmanship related activity for an individual to purchase from the CMP.No proof of marksmanship required if over age 60. Proof of club membership and citizenship required for all ages. NOTE: Proof of marksmanship activity is not required for purchase of ammunition, parts, publications or memorabilia.BE LEGALLY ELIGIBLE TO PURCHASE A FIREARM:The information you supply on your application will be submitted by the CMP to the FBI National Instant Criminal Check System (NICS) to verify you are not prohibited by Federal, State or Local law from acquiring or possessing a rifle. Your signature on the Purchaser Certification portion of the purchase application authorizes the CMP to initiate the NICS check and authorizes the FBI to inform CMP of the result. IMPORTANT: If your State or locality requires you to first obtain a license, permit, or Firearms Owner ID card in order to possess or receive a rifle, you must enclose a photocopy of your license, permit, or card with the application for purchase.As you can see, the CMP eligibility process is quite a bit more involved than the background check system we have now. It seems to have worked for keeping the powerful semiautomatic Garand rifles out of the hands of mass murderers. The last mass shooting on US soil that I know of which involved an M1 Garand was the Kent State massacre and that involved the Ohio National Guard shooting anti-war protesters, not civilians who were sold rifles through the CMP. I haven’t been able to find any records of crimes committed with guns sold through the CMP. I’m sure it has happened at one point in time or another, but the occurrence is so rare that there hasn’t been any documentation. My point is that the CMP has a really great track record in the United States for making sure guns don’t go to bad guys.Since the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 didn’t have any measurable impacts on crime and the CMP has great results, I propose we extend the CMP eligibility requirements to all semiautomatic centerfire firearms and centerfire magazines with more than ten rounds of capacity. This means only people who meet the listed criteria will be able to buy the types of weapons most useful in a militia which are also the weapons we primarily see used in mass shootings from an FFL. The proposal also effectively introduces a mandatory training and basic competency requirement before individuals can purchase semiautomatic centerfire weapons from a gun store. The inclusion of CMP eligibility for the purchase of centerfire magazine over ten rounds creates a strong incentive for existing gun owners and individuals who purchase firearms through private intrastate sales to get training and join the CMP if they want easy access to centerfire magazines over ten rounds.The word centerfire is really important because there is another class of firearms which use rimfire cartridges.A collection of rimfire and centerfire cartridges, left to right: .22lr (rimfire), .22WMR (rimfire), .357 magnum (centerfire), .30–06 Springfield (centerfire), 12 gauge shotshell (centerfire)Rimfire cartridges aren’t very powerful; they’re mostly used for small game hunting and target shooting. Most countries allow ownership of semiautomatic rimfire rifles with only basic licensing; countries like Canada and the UK don’t even have restrictions on magazine capacity for rimfire rifles. Could they be used by a mass shooter? Sure, anything could, but semiautomatic rimfire firearms just aren’t a threat compared to semiautomatic centerfire firearms or even non-semiautomatic centerfire firearms. Wounds caused by bullets fired from rimfire cartridges are almost always less severe than wounds caused by bullets fired from centerfire cartridges. Very precise shot placement is required for rimfire weapons to instantly kill a person and mass shooters are unlikely to take the time to precisely place their shots.Seen above are four rimfire rifles made by Marlin.Regulating firearms in this way allows new gun owners to hunt, shoot targets, and defend themselves using semiautomatic rimfire or manually operated firearms. If new gun owners want easy access to semiautomatic centerfire firearms which are useful in a militia context, they can join the CMP, effectively becoming a member of a well regulated militia, after demonstrating themselves to be competent and well trained.I have some final thoughts on the CMP related proposal before moving on to the next topic. CMP eligibility introduces additional layers of human interaction between people and semiautomatic centerfire weapons and centerfire magazines over ten rounds. Barring major advances in mental healthcare and adjudication in the United States, layers of human interaction are the best way for red flags to be raised about somebody who might want to kill large numbers of people with a firearm. Additional layers of human interaction also introduce a larger hurdle for straw purchasers, people who buy firearms for people who can’t pass background checks because they’re ineligible to own firearms. Additional layers of human interaction make law enforcement investigations slightly easier as well.At the moment, laws, standards, and permits for carrying concealed handguns vary wildly. Some states have no requirements while other states functionally don’t allow anybody except police officers to carry handguns in any way. While the percentage of the US population which actually carries handguns regularly, concealed or openly, is relatively small, those who do carry handguns regularly can often face great legal peril for no particularly good reason when crossing state lines. At the same time, it would be good for the public to know that people carrying concealed handguns are actually competent and not a hazard to the public. In essence, a balance would be preferable to the extremes which currently exist.I propose creating an national permit for carrying concealed handguns in any state. Police officers already enjoy something similar to this. The permitting process should include a standardized class which can be taught by police officers or other qualified instructors. Before attending the class, applicants should undergo a background check. Among other things, the class should cover the legal use of deadly force, safe firearms handling practices, and conflict deescalation practices. Then applicants should be given a written test on the subjects. If the applicants pass, they should then undergo a practical handgun handling and shooting competency test. If applicants are able to both handle handguns safely and shoot accurately, they will then be issued a carry permit which is valid for a certain number of years; three to five years seems reasonable. If applicants fail either test then they go home without a permit and can retake the whole class the next time it is offered if they still wish to carry a concealed handgun.It’s worth noting that if my suggestion to regulate handguns under the National Firearms Act were ever implemented, creating a national permit for carrying concealed handguns would practically become a necessity. At the moment, written approval from the BATFE is required before crossing state lines with an NFA firearm. That system would not be sustainable in terms of labor costs and paperwork if handguns suddenly came under the purview of the NFA.Footnotes[1] Murder[2] https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the...[3] National Firearms Act[4] National Firearms Act - Wikipedia[5] U.S.C. Title 26 - INTERNAL REVENUE CODE

In Simple Words REX is Compliance system initiated by European union for Certification of Origin.If one wants to export goods value exceeds 6000 EUR to Europe then has to attach this certificate with consignment.In Official Frame of words:Subject: – Certification of Origin of Goods for European Union Generalised System of Preferences (EU-GSP) – Modification of the system as of 1 January 2017.In exercise of powers conferred under paragraph 2.04 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-2020, the Director General of Foreign Trade hereby inserts a new sub para (c) under Para 2.104 Generalised System o...