Originally posted by kmax87
He is right, but he offers no useful solution, only a deflection from reality, that while it is true guns don't kill, people do, without the ready availability of guns, especially those with obscene rapid firepower, it would not be that easy to kill such large gorups of people without the perpetrator being stopped.
Having an inordinate amount of them lyi ...[text shortened]... and possible need to to relocate away from a location of very painful memory.
Your offer no useful solutions either.
"without the ready availability of guns, especially those with obscene rapid firepower, it would not be that easy to kill such large gorups of people without the perpetrator being stopped."
Demonstrably false. The largest death toll at a school was in Bath, MI 1927 via bombs, not guns.
Guns with smaller magazines can be just as deadly, and have adequate firepower. This argument is simply a precursor to banning and confiscating all firearms.
Sure paranoia can be catching, but that's a problem of parenting aside from guns. Sure you can argue that anything is likely not to be effective, but I hardly see your ideas as any more promising.
"1. If you want to own a gun, you need to also join a gun club, and you need to be a regular participant in club activities."
You want to revoke my freedom to choose my associates and activities? I don't think this idea will be big with most gun owners, unless they already belong to a club. This would also bring in registration which is also a precursor to confiscation.
"2. If you want to own a gun, you should have regular psychological testing. For the very least once every 2 years."
Sounds a lot like a movie where the government tracked down people who might commit a crime in the future. I don't believe any civil liberties survive that.
"3. Ban the sale of semi automatic/high powered weaponry and severely limit the sale of ammunition for the same."
That is a goal post that is totally portable. What is high powered today will inevitably grow, and include everything except and perhaps including bb guns.
The trouble with all these suggestions is that a very high percentage of people will ignore, and perhaps think that this is the trigger event for them to use those guns for defending their liberty. There obviously will be others who will simply ignore them, because they use weapons for criminal purposes, and no law will alter their actions. Beyond those risks there is the fact that guns are expensive. When you ban and confiscate them, are you planning on reimbursing the owners?
The whole thing sounds like an overarching statist plan which if it were implemented could bring absolute disaster, and probably would not accomplish its original goal.
Driving? Huh? We give 16 year olds in most States a license with minimal training or skill testing, and no mental testing. And they operate a heavy powerful machine in close quarters with others.
Anything is dangerous in the wrong hands. If someone with a gun breaks into your home, I dare you to tell him or her to wait while you get your car to defend yourself. Guns have utility that no other tool has. As soon as the fazer of Startrek is available I'm getting one. Defense without killing.