Originally posted by 3vilscript
Okay, I'll bite. Your right that driving exams are for the most part useless. But does that say something about the driving exams or does it say something about the people. Maybe some people should not be allowed to drive? Maybe with a more comprehensive exam you could find out who those drivers are. And if it can save the life of 1 innocent person is it not worth it? Because, as you say, the simplest approach is not working. The same with guns. The simplest approach, not hanging out with people who carry guns, calling the cops, etc., Is not working. So what then should we do?
I don't remember driving as being listed in the Bill of Rights. Some people shouldn't be allowed to drive, but these days driving is considered a right and not a privilege. Gun ownership is a recognized right by our Founding Fathers.
That said, the simplest approach is still the correct approach. If you know someone that is an idiot and owns a gun, don't hang out with him. Same as if you know someone who is an idiot and drives like an idiot...do you ride with him? It's the reasonable man theory, and assuming you are a reasonable man, you don't hang out with the idiot with the gun nor do you ride with the idiot driver.
You know what though? There are other idiots that will hang out with the guy with the gun or the wannabe Nascar driver in the Pinto. That's where natural selection takes over and these guys win a Darwin Award. Is that harsh? Maybe, but if someone is stupid enough to be stupid with a gun, car, lawnmower, or toothbrush and end up killing themselves, that's their problem. I shouldn't have to go through a archaic system of tests, etc, to buy a firearm just because some people are idiots.
Now I'm not against guns as I stated before. But I don't see why a responsible American would not want to go through a more difficult process of buying one. If indeed your plans are not to use it for criminal purposes then why not. Criminals are able to buy guns very easy, and that is just unacceptable.
I read that and to me it's like you just contradicted yourself. Why should a reasonable, law-abiding citizen have to go through this difficult and/or long process to buy a weapon.....just because criminals don't go through them? Criminals don't follow the rules anyways so how and why would forcing the people who do follow the rules and laws into a system where they have to suffer more?
And by the way, what's the need? There's already the national instant background check conducted for every firearm purchase. Also, if someone wants to carry a concealed firearm, they have to go through even more background checks and classes/training. Why do we need even more controls????
the gun rule would be: anyone can have whatever gun you want/like, and as many as you like. If you destroy another's
property with it whether intentional or not you will wholly pay for it's replacement. If you kill another not in defense of life, or impending harm,
you get to join them in the great beyond. If you continually display a lack of restraint with firearms, and other's safety, and property you will be
blacklisted, and not allowed to own any firearms. If caught with one you get to spend a lot of time in the pokey. Other than that buy em', shoot
em', wear em', enjoy em', and be responsible with them because irresponsibility will cost you a lot. That law singles out no one, covers everyone,
and affects the criminal as much as the responsible owner. After all it isn't the tool it is the operator. You can easily kill with a hammer, but
Home Depot has hundreds of them. Punish the evil doer, don't split hairs about the tool he used.
