You've just illustrated for us the difference between a right and a privilege.
I like that... I would go for a sort of devil's deal with conservatives and create legislation that treats gun ownership as a privilege and not a right... the long-term goal would be to phase out gun ownership all together... I'm surprised that Constitutionalists haven't been more vociferous about the main argument for gun control, which is to be prepared for the possibility of having to overthrow/resist an out-of-control, (totally!) unrighteous government... in which case I would reiterate my feeling that there are far more effective and less immediately violent ways of dealing with unjust command from above than by resorting to guns... passive resistance, shorting out lines of communication... fighting the panopticon directly with smart use of technology (hacking into computer systems) rather than tussling with the strong-arms employed to guard its perimeter... [with the government generally employing bureaucracy and the threat of violence more than violence itself... ipso facto, no need for guns... why disable the arms when you can just scramble the brains?]
Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.
Realize us, Madman!
I razed a slum, Amen.
Considering how well Bush has done getting armor for our troops, I don't think giving body armor to everyone at birth would be an easy task.
OFT. The military is one of the few things that I consider to be legitimate federal government jurisdiction (and we spend hundreds of billions a year on it), and they STILL can't get it right. The conditions under which many of our uniformed personnel operate are disgraceful. Look at the Veterans Administration fiasco. More than one person at the FFF conference last week was ex-military who had either A) been kicked out; B) hated the bureaucracy and left; or C) couldn't stomach the things they saw in Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, Iraq.
As for guns, I'm a fan. If you aren't, don't buy one. It's a truism throughout life: many of the coolest things (guns, drugs, fast cars, speed boats, love) are also the most dangerous. It IS scary to think that many Americans own (or could own) guns, but rights are not for someone to dictate to others. And this is from a native Philadelphian (our gun violence levels are obscene; however, most of it is drug-related, and committed with illegal street/straw buyer guns).
Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"
The US goverment estimates that there are about 223 MILLION guns in private hands in the United States. Those numbers alone should tell you that regardless of the laws, guns will not be going away anytime soon. In my opinion, opening up conceal and carry laws will reduce crime. (Legalizing drugs would have the most effect of anything, but that won't be happening, and is a different discussion). There are no criminals who have trouble finding/getting guns, making it more difficult for the normal citizens doesn't help anything.
Millions upon millions are in love with guns there. But guns are designed for one purpose only.
I disagree, I love target shooting (and am extremely good at it), but I have zero desire to hunt/kill anything. So, on that basis, you're wrong. Also, the same could be said about the bow and arrow, and about hunting knives/other large knives.
And the rest of the civilized world looks on with disgust.
Really? I disagree, there are many other countries where citizens have large numbers of guns (not even counting Africa/Middle East), in switzerland, every adult male is REQUIRED to have a selective fire rifle (lets you switch between semi-auto, and other modes such as burst and full-auto) and a semiautomatic handgun, in their homes. Yet, switzerland has one of the lowest crime rates in the world.
America has always had a high(ish) crime rate compared to other countries, I don't think gun laws have much to do with it, and I don't think changing those laws would effect the crime rate in a significant positive way.