More on the wave of gun control idiocy.

An individual over on the Lazy O offers this typically fringe-left effort on the road to banning guns:

addad 17 Hours Ago

How about this:
- You want to own a gun, you take a written test, then take a field test, then you're granted a license. You're then eligible to own a gun.
- When you buy a gun, the gun is registered in your name. You are required to buy insurance that covers each gun that you own. This protects you, the gun owner, in case the gun is stolen, and also covers your liability for any damage the weapon does (by your or another's hand.)
- Ammo purchases require documentation of license, insurance and registration of firearm that matches ammo being bought.
- Private firearm sales require transfer of registration, similar to vehicle sale.
This type of system would go a long way toward keeping guns and ammo out of the hands of unqualified/irresponsible folks, and add a layer of protection for responsible gun owners in case of theft/accident. I know it's less convenient, but that's no longer a valid argument.

And after you do/require all that and it serves to increase the illegal use of guns...  Then what's the next step?

I responded thus:

I've got an even better idea: Stop punishing the innocent for the acts of the guilty.

How about this:
- You want to own a computer, you take a written test, then take a field test, then you're granted a license. You're then eligible to own a computer.
- When you buy a computer, the computer is registered in your name. You are required to buy insurance that covers each computer that you own. This protects you, the computer owner, in case the computer is stolen, or used to liable another and also covers your liability for any damage your computer does (by your or another's hand.)
- Toner purchases require documentation of license, insurance and registration of a printer that matches the toner being bought.
- Private computer sales require transfer of registration, similar to vehicle sale.
This type of system would go a long way toward keeping computers and toner out of the hands of unqualified/irresponsible folks who thoughtlessly comment on newspaper stories, and add a layer of protection for responsible computer owners in case of theft/accident. I know it's less convenient, but that's no longer a valid argument.
___________________

You see, your first amendment right is no less precious to you than my second amendment right is to me.

As it's been pointed out, firearms ownership is a RIGHT.  If you would have no difficulty infringing my 2nd Amendment rights, and claiming that those, like me who point to the issue of "inconvenience" as being a PERFECTLY valid argument as being " invalid," well... I've laid out the alternative.  Let's make you ability to write and post comments as "inconvenient" as possible... how's that?

View weapons as tools: the old bromide of "blaming a gun for violence is like blaming a fork for obesity" applies here.

Addad, the problem with what you're advocating is that none of it would make any difference to the main perpetrators of violence: criminals will laugh at your massive, bureaucratic wave of paper and increased costs to feed it... and continue to ignore it.

Meanwhile, the segment that ignores the laws concerning firearms will continue to ignore those laws... and those of us following those laws will suffer for the actions of those who could care less.

Nothing advocated by you or the rest of the gun-grabbers (and face it, taking our guns away IS your ultimate goal) would change anything for the bad guys.

Stop attacking the symptoms.  Get to the causes.  And, perhaps, implement the laws of countries where gun crime is practically unknown: say, execute anyone who uses a gun for any crime, and sentence those even in possession of a gun during the commission of a crime to life without parole, whether they use it or not.

As a society, we have proven that our inability to actually address the problems confronting us causes us all to suffer.  Instead of actually effecting change that will make any difference, you propose additionally a nibbling at the edges that will, in the end, accomplish nothing.

We must do what needs to be done.  Until then, all of this is a waste of time, a poetic confusion of motion with action, where in the end, nothing gets done... nothing gets changed... and people continue to die, unnecessarily.