Steve CoxKonto zweryfikowane

I do see harm in the government presuming guilt just because you want to buy a firearm. Definitely. And again, Carol Bowne. http://www.courierpostonline.com/story/news/crime/2015/06/04/woman-fatally-stabbed-berlin-twp/28461361/ …

Fair. I digress on said issue, appreciate the input.

It’s worth noting I don’t think I have an answer to the problem, or even want to comment if a solution exists. I just- personally- would like to see more done to protect everyone in regards to firearms. That does not mean disarming all.

In a nation of likely between 400 million and 650 million guns already owned, I don't think there's an effective way to do that while respecting the rights of the overwhelming majority of people. Check out the numbers I'll lay out in the next posts: 1/

There are approx 100 million gun owners and approximately 30,000 people die via firearm every year - 1/3 homicide, 2/3 suicide. That means even if every single death is caused by a different gun owner, it would take over 33 years to get to 1% of gun owners having killed someone.

1% of 100 million = 1 million 1 million divided by 30,000 = 33 1/3 It would be wrong to penalize that much of an overwhelming majority of people, especially since the measures likely wouldn't prevent much crime anyway. You know? 3/3

The only retroactive change I have suggested is requiring gun owners to register firearms with a national registry though. Everything else would be proactively done, in my scenario.

Why? Not being obtuse, just trying to follow your logic. Why require registration?