A simple solution…


…and for all the same reasons.

  1. Guns are valuable possessions and ownership should be protected …just like cars
  2. When used improperly, either by accident or with criminal intent, guns can cause property damage, personal injury, even death …just like cars

This solution does not require the creation of new, complex bureaucracy
or contentious legislation. Simply clone the existing DMV, or expand it to include firearms as well as cars.

No reasonable argument can be made against this approach
No one thinks the DMV is coming to take their cars away.
No one claims the DMV is infringing on their freedom.
If one has not previously argued against the existence of the DMV, one simply cannot make a logical or moral argument against this solution.


  1. Guns should be licensed, registered and insured …just like cars
  2. Gun owners should be tested, licensed and insured …just like drivers
    …and for all the same reasons

Registering and insuring guns protects owners in case of theft, and aids in resale.
It makes it easier for law enforcement to track and identify stolen guns, and provides proof-of-ownership in the marketplace.

Testing and insuring owners protects everyone, including gun owners, from the consequences of accidental injury, and adds another layer of incrimination against those who would steal guns and/or use stolen guns for criminal activities.


Recent mass murders have again heightened public interest in treating powerful weapons as a special case separate from other types of gun ownership (i.e. hunting, personal protection), as has happened in the wake of many other mass killings in recent years. While the legislation proposed here should help keep ALL guns, including military-style weapons, out of the hands of terrorists, it is not hard to imagine ways to differentiate certain types of weapons for special consideration because of their extremely deadly nature. Just as special classes of operator licenses, requiring specialized training and testing and background checks, are mandated for over-the-road truck drivers and cab drivers, those wishing to own military-style weapons can be subject to specific additional licensing procedures. We’re still talking parallel structure and parallel concept here, vehicles:guns. 18-wheelers are potentially more dangerous than cars, especially when hauling flammable substances, so their operators are singled out for special treatment in order to keep our roads safe. Singling out owners of automatic weapons is equally logical, and good for public safety.

Combating global terrorism is the job of the U.S. Armed Forces and we support them wholeheartedly in that effort. Meanwhile, we as citizens can do our part by supporting legislation to


Next Steps…

Learn how you can do your part. Become a member. Start a TGLC Chapter in your community. Sport a TGLC hat or T-shirt. Add your voice. It’s the right thing to do.

This solution will gain the support of major players:

Insurance companies will enjoy a huge new revenue stream from insuring guns and gun owners. The insurance lobby and PACs will support this approach for obvious financial reasons.

States will also enjoy a huge new revenue stream from licenses and fees. The monies can be used for law enforcement, public education, infrastructure, or any use they determine, all without re-inventing the wheel.

Those concerned about the federal government dictating terms to their states will be happy to know that their state and local governments will still be able to enact and enforce local gun regulations, just as they do traffic laws. No cause for concern here.
Their state treating guns like cars will protect them as gun owners, not limit their rights.

Yes, the NRA. Who knows more about gun safety than the NRA? No one. That’s why they should be put in charge of developing and administering gun owner testing, equivalent to the driver’s ed courses required prior to licensing new drivers. Training and testing will create a huge new revenue stream for them and they will no doubt increase their membership enormously as a result. Moreover, this will ease their stated fears about so-called “gun control” as they get to participate in the process.

Collecting license and registration fees on every gun sale will increase their revenues, as they will be entitled to retain a small portion of those fees to compensate them for the added paperwork. Registration will also enable them to determine the provenance and legal history of guns for resale, making sales easier and ensuring their protection from litigation.

Administering NRA-approved live gun-owner testing will provide a huge new revenue stream for shooting ranges, as well as help them attract new customers. Ranges will be authorized to check customers’ licenses just as car rental companies do today, and then offer testing and registration services to those without.

Being able to quickly identify the owners of guns will make it easier for law enforcement to do their job in cases involving gun play, and to return stolen firearms to their rightful owners. Impounding unregistered firearms until the owners become licensed to use them and legally register them will keep guns out of the hands of those with ill intent. Meanwhile, law-abiding citizens will be able to reclaim their property with no problem. To repeat: no problem.

Endorsing a simple, effective, popular and politically feasible approach to improving gun safety in the U.S. should be a no-brainer for anyone who wishes to gain or retain political office. This is sensible gun safety, not “gun control” (whatever that is) any more than the DMV can be called “car control.”

This solution is good for gun owners, for law enforcement, for small business, for state and local budgets, and for the general public who wishes to be safer than they are today from the potential to be victims of gun violence and accidents. Assuming all of the above will vote their self-interest, we have a winner, and that winner is…