Good news for you, as I'll address further, most of what you want is already law to and extent. Though that can be refined a bit. I'll explain.
Anyone with a felony conviction or dishonorable discharge is already disbarred legally from owning a weapon. To refine that I would rather that the felonies be only those that are violent or have violence as a component(black market felonies) and I would remove dishonorable discharge, they are both catchalls that overgeneralize the removal of rights. If they were shortened in scope to eliminate non-violent offenses and had a period certain opportunity for the restitution of rights for good behavior it would be perfect law.
I think only violent FELONS should have gun rights removed, as well as those with ties to violent organized crime groups.
Anyone involuntarily committed to an institution of mental health is disqualified from owning a gun, I like your idea of only limiting mental disorders to those of violence or potential psychotic breaks, makes more sense than someone within the fully functioning autism spectrum being disbarred "just because". I think upon conditions of medicating the problem within control some people could have their rights restored. But I am not willing to go as far as mandatory testing for everyone who wants a gun, it's a little too far on the prior restraint side for my tastes. Rights do have some responsibilities and risks.
A lot of the disorders I listed don't confine people to mental institutions. Obviously under normal circumstances someone in an asylum isn't going to get guns anytime soon. Psychopaths, however, aren't delusional, and they are very good at pretending to be normal, so it would be harder to catch them without a psych exam. If a shrink evaluating gun customers leads to too many accidental lack of gun rights for people who are sane, I would be willing to go with your idea.
I also don't think that ALL mental disorders should lead to no gun rights. I'm on the autism spectrum and I could probably handle guns, although I don't particularly like having them around. It is an unsupported myth that aspies are violent - only if they have comorbidity with a mental illness that causes aggression they are not really prone to violence.
No argument to your first group.........but you have to prove it, street gangs would be the most preferable group, they are the most random in application of violence. You have to go out of your way to be on a Mafia hit list, and cartels are a combination of being in the wrong place at the wrong time OR being in their way. Street gangs will shoot at the wrong address and call it a write off.
I'm talking about actually being a member or a voluntary associate. Street gang members should definitely have no gun rights removed.
[/QUOTE]Okay, no problem with restricting WMDs, they are indifferent weapons, area effective, and you don't aim them as much as disperse them. Explosives have a purpose, and a semi-safe handling, they shouldn't be outright legal but permittable, I have no problem with an advance license requirement for ownership and detonation. "Sniper" rifles are really just long guns, there is nothing about them that makes them deadlier than a hunting rifle, most large bore hunting rifles are accurate from +705yds to a little over a mile, with the longest shot ever placed on target at about 2mi. by a Canadian sniper using a Barrett .50cal. but just about any long barreled hunting rifle will shoot up to about a mile and on target if you know how to adjust for windage and loss of velocity.[/QUOTE]
When I talk about explosives I'm talking more about bombs. Anything that can demolish an entire building or CITY is definitely out of line. I'm uncomfortable with allowing grenades as they have a very limited self-defense purpose. Any grenade license must have STRINGENT requirements and restrictions. I don't see why anyone who's not an LEO or in the armed forces would have explosives and grenades in the first place, as they would not work well for home defense or a possible mass shooting situation, but if grenades can be used responsibly in such a manner a strict registration program would not be a problem. Having illegal explosives and firearms without a license should be a FELONY with at LEAST 5-10 years in prison.
Criminal background check, IF there is a further question by civilians(such as the gun range owner in Colorado) who notice behaviors that are a little off allow for them to sign a sworn affadavit, legally binding, that allows for further questioning/testing.
The thing is