It's gun owners, not guns, that need to be controlled

Statistics - Rampage Shootings

For the period 2009 – 2013, the U.S. had 0.75 fatalities per 1 million population by rampage shootings. Though having more restrictive gun laws, 5 other countries had higher fatalities by the same cause. Of the 6 that had lower fatality ratios than the U.S.

Statistics - Murders by Any Means

The U.S. ranked 94th in number of per capita murders by any means.

A RATIONAL SOLUTION

Under the guise of "prevention", there are those who would make all schools just as prison-like as public buildings and airports. It's another "punish everybody, strip away their freedoms, and dehumanizes everyone due to the insanity of a few" solution that creates more problems. The U.S. is already effectively a police state and slowly becoming like a prison with respect to armed guards, IDs, metal detectors, cameras, and covert surveillance everywhere, including of one's private communications. Thus, the Fourth Amendment is already at risk. Historically, such jack-boot measures are introduced "for the good of the people" but ultimately lead to disarming the people whereupon tyranny has free reign. We're already on that slippery slope, and our Founding Fathers knew well where it could ultimately lead.
It's the omission of "well regulated" (well trained) from state statutory law that allows any yahoo to own any type of gun (except automatic weapons) in states that don't require background checks at gun shows or private sales. And even background checks are inadequate as they are missing 80% of the data required to screen out unstable individuals. The Founding Fathers did not want gun bans and a standing army, which they knew would be used to impose governmental tyranny as the British did throughout their empire. Instead, they wanted a well trained and equipped citizenry to be called to duty in case of invasion (like in Switzerland), and for such citizens to have the right to defend themselves. That’s why they enshrined the Second Amendment as part of our Constitution. If each state were simply to require gun owners in their states to be well trained and certified on the use, maintenance, and safety of any firearm they own or intend to purchase, there would be fewer gun deaths and less of an opportunity for unstable people to get their hands on them. Such a law would also enervate cries for disarming everyone and would bring about full compliance to the 2nd Amendment.

The systems for gun owner training and concealed or open carry permits are already in place when obtaining a gun permit. Those requirements include vetting, training, demonstration of competence, and certification. Not all rights are absolute, particularly where there is a threat to public safety. Imagine if anyone who bought a car were allowed to drive on public roads by the mere fact of car ownership.

The extant U.S. Supreme Court decision on the 2nd Amendment is District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). The court ruled that the 2nd Amendment confirms an individual right to bear arms. It also states, "Finally, the adjective “well-regulated” implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training. See Johnson 1619 (“Regulate”: “To adjust by rule or method”); Rawle 121–122; cf. Va. Declaration of Rights §13 (1776), in 7 Thorpe 3812, 3814 (referring to “a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms”)."
See https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZO.html

Accordingly, the Heller decision acknowledges states' Constitutional right and responsibility of "imposing proper discipline and training" on gun owners.

Despite having perhaps the strictest gun laws in the U.S., Los Angeles is one of the cities with the highest gun violence. Yet, California currently has no law that imposes proper discipline and training upon gun owners (except to get a gun permit), a state right and responsibility confirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. It’s the same situation in other areas - strict gun laws but high gun violence – Chicago, Detroit, Washington D.C., etc. However, California does have a referendum process. :) And so do 23 other states. Obviously, “gun control” is a red herring policy that needs to be replaced with gun owner control. Moreover, the ubiquitous presence of well-trained gun owners would not only act as a deterrent for the unstable to use a weapon in a public place as proven hundreds of thousands of times, but could bring disciplined deadly force to ending any active shooter situation.

The shortcut, therefore, is to get a referendum on the ballot of 1 or more referendum states requiring the state to impose certification of proper discipline and training on gun owners, by state law enforcement or National Guard, retroactively within a reasonable amount of time (e.g. 90 days), upon penalty of fines and/or confiscation, and certification of having done so prior to new gun purchases for that type of weapon. Even Liberals would vote for that. Each state can also decide whether they want to impose age limits, concealed and/or open carry, and in which counties. That’d be far better than some Federally dictated one-size-fits-all “solution” that would only create more problems.

If passed, legal challenges to such a state Gun Training Act would directly challenge the Supreme Court precedent in Heller. The NRA wouldn't want to touch that since it confirms an individual right to bear arms and was written by Conservative and strict constructionist, Justice Scalia for the majority. Even if a Federal District Court were to accept such a challenge on the specific issue, "Does the Second Amendment confer a state right and/or responsibility to impose training and discipline gun owners?", they would have to rule against the Supreme Court in Heller, thus setting up the likelihood for a Supreme Court review of that District Court decision. In that case, the existing Conservative Supreme Court bench would have to reverse themselves on Heller (highly unlikely) OR confirm that right and responsibility for ALL states!

If Federal Supreme Court review can result in same-sex marriage becoming the law of the land on a bypass of the U.S. Congress, why not gun training? ;)

Regarding California, there is a California State Senator (R) who might propose such a legislative initiative for a referendum - Janet Nguyen.
• Gender: Female and mother of 2 children – not another “White Male”
• “Race”: Asian born in Vietnam – sidesteps “White/Black” racial divide
• Republican: State Senator representing District 34, Republican stronghold Orange County – her proposing the bill would ameliorate the perception that Republicans don’t care about public safety and are against rational gun control, giving her notoriety among the Liberal press.
• Legislative Committees: Member of the Select Committee on Women, Work and Families; Vice Chair of Health Committee; Member of Veterans Affairs.
• Cross-cultural: Speaks English, Spanish, and Vietnamese
• Awards: Class of 2008 Latino Orange County 100; OC Metro Magazine 2006 "25 Hottest People" in Orange County; Listed in Orange County Register "30 Vietnamese-Americans to Watch"; We Give Thanks 2004 Women of Vision Award; 2008 St. Anselm's Cultural Diversity Award
• Public Safety: Given a top rating (100%) by the California Police Chiefs Association, November 29, 2017.
• Has an online form for proposing legislation!
http://district34.cssrc.us/content/constituent-bill-proposal

PURPOSE OF LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE

To get a California Legislative Initiative on the November ballot requiring gun owners to get trained and certified on the weapons they own or intend to purchase as called for by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (“well regulated” = well-trained) and as confirmed as a state’s right and responsibility by the U.S. Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), to wit:

“Finally, the adjective ‘well-regulated’ implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training. See Johnson 1619 (‘Regulate’: ‘To adjust by rule or method’); Rawle 121–122; cf. Va. Declaration of Rights §13 (1776), in 7 Thorpe 3812, 3814 (referring to ‘a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms’)."

PLAN

1. Create a Steemit Group for this purpose, e.g. “Concerned Citizens for Gun Training”, with all welcome to join.
2. State the above purpose of the group.
3. Invite all your followers to join and ask them to invite their followers.
4. Accumulate thousands of California members, at least one of which resides in District 34, Orange County.
5. Do an online survey of the group on the question, “Should gun owners get trained and certified on the weapons they own or intend to purchase as called for by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (“well regulated” = well-trained)?”
6. Have an appropriate District 34 member fill out Janet’s online form for proposing Constituent Bill Proposal.
7. Find other favorable Senators in other states that provide a referendum process to receptive to championing a Gun Owner Training Bill for their state and complete their Constituent Bil Proposal process.
8. Group members to hound their sponsoring a Legislator to get their respective “Gun Owner Training” Initiatives through committee on onto the November ballot until done.