Yeah, I knew it was a stretch. I guess my only point is that it sounds like a terrible change to you now, but maybe it would turn out to not be that big a deal in reality.
Well, I would think that registration would be accompanied by increased vetting of who the gun is being sold to. Clearly, the seller would want to verify that they are not selling to someone who should not be buying. Maybe it increases the chances that his red flags get picked up before the transaction is made.
Maybe, maybe not. In reality, we will never know the answer. I don't think it will ever happen. If it does, the stats will be the stats and we won't know what crimes would have been committed had things not changed. I do think that fewer guns in the U.S., and making guns a bit more difficult to acquire, is a lot more likely to decrease gun crime than to increase it.
Don't be so sure.
Sorry, Been, I don't mean to be piling on with more questions, but I can't help myself. You think there should be more vetting of gun buyers. What would the increased vetting consist of? How deep into someone's private life would the vetting go? If the suspect had been to a therapist for depression would that become government knowledge? How would the government obtain that knowledge; would it claim the right to interfere with doctor/client privilege? Would the vetting information also be stored in the national database? Who would have access to the information? People like Samantha Power? What would be the punishment of someone who breached the database and turned over private information of a suspect to a news organization? How does an innocent person get his good name back? What exactly does the government need to know before it allows a person to arm himself? Why do free people need government permission to arm themselves?
