- Joined
- Sep 7, 2001
- Messages
- 647
Restricting firearms to possession/carry only by licensed individuals is no different from allowing the State to choose not to allow any citizens to carry or possess firearms at all. Just because it hasn't happend just means that it hasn't happened yet; sooner or later it will - look at California.
The law should concentrate on punishing those people who act innapropriately, not on some complicated system of permissions based on everchanging criteria. Criteria such as that are always circumventable, and end up only being obeyed by those who would not cause problems in the first place. IOW they become expensive and useless.
Spend the money used to implement firearms registration/licensing/other crappy social-engineering make-work project on LEOs to get out on the street and catch evil-doers instead. The effect will be more immediate, it's proven that police presence prevents crime. If the police are kept in line by a strict reading of the Constitution and by good pay, excellent training, then the dangers of a police state fade away.
The other benefits come from a population that is brought up to believe that each individual is responsible for himself and for his neighbours, and that the police are there to assist in this, not to achieve it. Security cannot be provided by a State that respects the rights of individuals, rather it must be sought after by each individual. The State would provide much more security by spending resources on maintaining a society that has an active interest in maintaining their own security rather than spending resources trying to create huge databases such as the TIA project.
Use the courts to enforce a certain level of civility so that training with firearms, while not required by statute, becomes extremely desirable (a factor in civil/criminal trials, etc) and you get a higher level of training for "free".
All this nonsense about trying to keep tabs on every single person who ever breathed in the US would disappear, and such stupidity as worrying about nail files on a frigging air liner wouldn't even be on the radar.
Pierre
The law should concentrate on punishing those people who act innapropriately, not on some complicated system of permissions based on everchanging criteria. Criteria such as that are always circumventable, and end up only being obeyed by those who would not cause problems in the first place. IOW they become expensive and useless.
Spend the money used to implement firearms registration/licensing/other crappy social-engineering make-work project on LEOs to get out on the street and catch evil-doers instead. The effect will be more immediate, it's proven that police presence prevents crime. If the police are kept in line by a strict reading of the Constitution and by good pay, excellent training, then the dangers of a police state fade away.
The other benefits come from a population that is brought up to believe that each individual is responsible for himself and for his neighbours, and that the police are there to assist in this, not to achieve it. Security cannot be provided by a State that respects the rights of individuals, rather it must be sought after by each individual. The State would provide much more security by spending resources on maintaining a society that has an active interest in maintaining their own security rather than spending resources trying to create huge databases such as the TIA project.
Use the courts to enforce a certain level of civility so that training with firearms, while not required by statute, becomes extremely desirable (a factor in civil/criminal trials, etc) and you get a higher level of training for "free".
All this nonsense about trying to keep tabs on every single person who ever breathed in the US would disappear, and such stupidity as worrying about nail files on a frigging air liner wouldn't even be on the radar.
Pierre