RE: Alarming statistics.

["Eric Benson" <ebenson@xxxxxxxx>]

>Depriving criminals, the mentally ill, the drug addicted and so on the
>ability to purchase or obtain firearms is an admirable goal.  I don't know
>a single gun owner who's against it.

Disagree.  There is an audience who feels that the second amendment is
absolute and should not be interfered with.  Some of the same people also
think that the government is out to get them.

This isn't my personal feeling (I don't think the government could cares
about the average citizen) but a blanket statement about gun owners isn't
any more correct than "all gun owners want to shoot people and rape their
neighbors cat".

Part of the question is also the statute of limitations.  If someone was
treated for depression, should that effect their ability to buy a pistol 20
years later? How about someone whose parents put them on Ritalin... should
they be able to buy a pistol when they are of age?  If someone was
convicted, served their time and 20 years later is a model citizen, should
they be able to purchase?

Personally, we require licenses for a lot of other things - cars, airplanes
and even marriage.  Firearms, we assume that you will possess an innate
ability to use (or learn from more bad US TV).  I would much rather see a
requirement for 'proof of competence or training' rather than the absurd
'gee that gun looks cool' or absolute laws currently in vogue.

But either way, it's a bit moot.  This discussion really has little to do
with Millenniums End and should probably be taken to email.

-Eric