After reviewing the last few pages, I gather facts about guns don’t matter, effectiveness of policies are either beyond our comprehension or don’t matter, and Frink’s mom is one happening lady.
Also, I like Collipso’s new avatar.
Since banning guns entirely will never be likely, I’m interested in more feasible solutions. For instance, the rubber bullets idea is actually a fairly reasonable solution: it may not be 100% effective, but I guarantee 17 people wouldn’t have died on Valentine’s Day if the perpetrator only had access to rubber bullets. The same enjoyable aspects of guns would remain, while the lethal aspect would be drastically reduced.
Like I said earlier, all guns should be registered with something like a title following every transaction. Definitely in order to own, but even better would be limiting the ability to shoot without training and a license renewed every three or five years. No training without a permit certified by a particular licensing agency. No gun purchases to anyone under 21. No training for anyone under 16. I mean, guns and cars are both potentially quite lethal–the two are quite comparable, only fewer people shoot than drive. A police officer should be allowed to see a man with a gun and ask him to produce his license to own.
You are an exception! I think states should have greater leeway to implement gun control laws, because a “well regulated Militia” is “necessary to the security of a free State.” States should be able to implement rules to that end. This should be especially true under a state’s general police powers. Because of the dastardly 14th Amendment, the Court said the 2nd Amendment limits the states as it does the federal government, but I think there is room for states to do more than the federal government might be able to.
I could get into a fight with you about the “dastardly 14th Amendment”, but I won’t.
A fight over the 14th Amendment would probably be fisticuffs.
