Dingdingding! Rule number one! It cannot, will not, EVER work, right? :lol:
No, it
could work. Thing is, it won't work
with conditions the way they are currently. There are preconditions that would have to be met before it would have a chance of working - securing the borders, real commerce security checks - and believe it or not, those preconditions are even
less likely to be met first. Otherwise, it's like putting a screen door on the top of a submarine then submerging. Stupid and easy to predict failure.
I can't be bothered to go back to that post of mine where, in response to LeVeL, I made a few suggestions; you'll have to look it up yourself. But somehow, I doubt that each and every one of them has once been enforced nationwide, simultaneously.
IIRC, most of your suggestions had been tried nationally or in places where the fact that it wasn't national didn't matter at all (Hawaii - it's an island, nothing can sneak in across state lines at least in theory). All had been failures to one or another degree. I'll just take apart your first paragraph as an example.
Safe Storage is mandated in over half the states - nationalization would not affect this. Children are still getting access to weapons anyway in Safe Storage states. Amusingly for your contention, reasonable safe storage laws are not only not opposed but promoted by gun rights advocates.
Limitations on concealed carry - um... in almost every state but four of them, concealed carry requires a permit or is either specifically or de facto banned. Again, nationalization would not make a difference. Again, severely restricting concealed carry has not worked to reduce gun crime.
Ammo restrictions: Already a Federal law. Already enforced nationally. Already a failure because there is no practical way to govern an individual's ammo manufacture.
Gun marketing: Guns are not marketed to children as that is actually already illegal in the US IIRC. No major media outlet will accept ads for guns already. The only marketing of guns in mass media is done by (surprise) the mass media whilst they glorify violence - not the gun manufacturers.
Wielding guns in public for no reason: Already illegal in every single state as 'brandishing.' In open carry states, you may *carry* your weapon openly in a non-threatening manner - slung or holstered. You may not actually wield it in public for no reason. Carries jail time in every state. has done nothing to prevent violence.
Stipulate that every sentence for a crime must be increased if a gun was used: Already Federal law. Already enforced. Already a failure, doesn't deter anything.
Fix the price of every variety of gun and offer buybacks at those prices, i.e. remove the profit motive - working firearms are not investments, they're weapons: Current investment grade guns basically become worthless if you ever fire them. Also, investment guns are almost never used in crimes, are often stored in bank vaults. Even the most successful buybacks with people paying retail for weapons turned in (again, Hawaii) have not had any effect on gun crimes.
Track all guns from the point of manufacture/importation to the point of destruction/deactivation: no sale may go unrecorded and no loss or theft unreported; if you fail to record/report it, you're punished: Already law in several states, including Hawaii. In the case of Hawaii (again, a case where nationalization does not matter) it's been an abject failure there as well. No effect on crime or unregistered firearms appearing at crime scenes.