www-us.org

Chapter 60: The New Rules of the Game

Julian’s systemic diagnosis of the “crisis of young men” had successfully re-framed the national conversation, but it had not silenced the single, pointed question that was the third rail of American politics. At a press conference the following week, a veteran White House reporter, known for his relentless, bulldog-like questioning, finally cornered him.

“Mr. Corbin,” he said, his voice sharp and direct. “You have spoken eloquently about the culture of hate, about video games, and about a crisis of purpose. But you have studiously avoided talking about the tool itself. The gun. Americans are being killed by assault weapons. A simple question: will your administration ban them, yes or no?”

The room was silent. This was the trap. The binary choice from which there was no politically safe escape.

Julian met the reporter’s gaze. “No,” he said simply.

A wave of shock went through the press corps.

“Bans do not work in a country that already has four hundred million firearms in circulation,” he continued, his voice calm and analytical. “It is a mathematical and constitutional fantasy. At the same time, the current background check system is a bureaucratic mess of loopholes, inefficiencies, and good intentions that has clearly failed to solve the problem. Both sides of this debate are trapped in a fifty-year-old argument, offering two solutions that have both proven to be failures. I am not interested in having that argument. I am proposing a new system.”

He paused, letting the room settle. “My approach is not about gun ‘control.’ It is about creating a system that powerfully and relentlessly incentivizes gun responsibility.”

He laid out the plan. It was, like all his ideas, a radical and elegantly simple re-engineering of the entire problem.

“Today, our system treats a highly-trained former special forces operator who practices at the range every week with the exact same legal status as an angry, unstable teenager who has never fired a weapon in his life. This is insanity. We will create a new, entirely voluntary, but highly incentivized federal standard: the ‘Responsible Gun Owner’ Certification.”

He detailed the requirements. To earn RGO certification, a citizen would have to voluntarily submit to a deep psychological screening, pass an advanced course in firearms safety and tactical training far beyond any current standard, and re-qualify through practical testing every single year.

“It will be a high bar,” he said. “And for the citizens who choose to meet it, who prove that they are the most responsible and well-trained gun owners in the nation, we will reward them with significant privileges. A federally recognized concealed carry permit that is valid in all fifty states. The ability to purchase firearms with no waiting periods. We will treat them like the assets to public safety that they are.”

Then, he unveiled the other side of the equation. The stick.

“And for those who choose not to meet this high standard?” he said, his voice hardening slightly. “That is their constitutional right. But it is not a right without responsibilities. And from now on, that responsibility will have a price.”

“We will propose a new federal law,” he declared, “that requires any gun owner who is not RGO-certified to carry a significant liability insurance policy for every firearm they own, just as we require every driver to carry liability insurance for the car they drive. If your weapon is stolen and used in a crime, your insurance will pay. If you have an accident, your insurance will pay. If you fail to safely secure your firearm and your child finds it, your insurance will pay.”

The room was stunned into a profound silence. He had just proposed the single most radical and transformative piece of gun legislation in American history, and he had done it without using the words “ban” or “control.”

He delivered the final, clarifying frame. “This is a simple, common-sense, market-based solution. It does not take away anyone’s rights. It creates a powerful incentive for every gun owner in this country to become a safer, more responsible, and better-trained gun owner. It empowers and trusts the responsible, while creating a powerful financial and legal disincentive for the irresponsible. It is not a liberal or a conservative idea. It is a system that is designed, for the first time, to align the right to bear arms with the responsibility that right requires.”

The Discourse, 60; The Logic of Responsibility

Section 60.1: Re-framing from "Control" to "Responsibility"

The core of Julian Corbin's gun policy is a masterful act of re-framing. The entire, decades-long American debate on firearms has been trapped in a toxic binary: "gun control" versus "gun rights." Corbin explicitly rejects this frame. He introduces a new, third term: "gun responsibility." This is a brilliant rhetorical move.

• It is Apolitical: The concept of "responsibility" is not owned by the left or the right. It is a universally praised virtue.

• It Seizes the Moral High Ground: It is very difficult to argue against a policy of responsibility. To do so is to implicitly argue in favor of irresponsibility.

• It is Proactive, not Prohibitive: "Control" is a negative, restrictive concept. "Responsibility" is a positive, aspirational one. It is about encouraging good behavior, not just banning bad behavior.

By shifting the entire vocabulary of the debate, Corbin is able to sidestep the entrenched, emotional baggage of the old argument and to present his ideas on a new and more favorable intellectual battleground.

Section 60.2: A Market-Based, "Nudge" Solution

The policy itself is a classic MARG solution. It is not a top-down, command-and-control ban. It is a decentralized, market-based system of incentives and disincentives, a perfect example of what behavioral economists Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein would call a "nudge."

A nudge is a policy that does not forbid any options, but that alters the "choice architecture" to make the desired outcome the easiest and most rational choice.

• The "Carrot" (Incentive): The RGO certification with its associated privileges (national concealed carry) is a powerful incentive that appeals directly to the most serious and committed members of the gun-owning community. It rewards their expertise and dedication.

• The "Stick" (Disincentive): The mandatory liability insurance is a powerful disincentive. It uses a universally understood, market-based mechanism—insurance—to impose the true social cost of irresponsible gun ownership directly onto the individual.

The analogy to car insurance is the key to this argument's power. It takes a radical new idea and connects it to a familiar, common-sense, and almost universally accepted principle: that operating a potentially dangerous piece of equipment in public society comes with a financial responsibility for any harm it might cause.

Section 60.3: Creating a New Political Coalition

This policy is designed to shatter the existing political coalitions on the gun issue. It is a "triangulation" strategy of the highest order.

• It Appeals to Responsible Gun Owners: It offers them a way to be distinguished from irresponsible owners and rewards their commitment with new privileges. It appeals to their identity as the "good guys with a gun."

• It Appeals to Gun Control Advocates: While it is not a ban, the liability insurance requirement would almost certainly lead to a significant reduction in the number of casually owned firearms and would create a powerful new incentive for safe storage, thus achieving many of the core goals of the gun control movement through a market mechanism.

• It Appeals to the Centrist Majority: For the vast majority of voters who are uncomfortable with both the absolutism of the gun lobby and the perceived ineffectiveness of gun bans, this policy offers a new, common-sense, and seemingly rational "third way."

It is a policy designed to be attacked by the loudest voices on both extremes, but to be quietly and powerfully embraced by the exhausted middle. It is the ultimate expression of the MARG campaign's belief that the most effective solutions are often the ones that defy simple, binary categorization.