| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
More Helmke-isms |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory Morris, 3/8/08 10:47:48 am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From this article, Mr. Helmke states that "it’s harder to buy Sudafed than it is to buy a gun". First of all, he makes a great point that sudafed regulations are stupid (GDC has an interesting WoD/WoG comparison here.)
The point is though, he's wrong. To buy a gun, even in a gun-friendly state, you have to submit to a local/state/federal background check. That is after filling out a long form with all of your personal information, and promising that you haven't done a huge list of things that would make it illegal for you to own a gun. Then, the check may or may not be "instant", depending on the whims of the system. If the check is put on hold, you have at least 3 days to wait. Here in the "Gun-shine State", you have to wait 3 days in many counties before you can pick your gun up anyway.
Is it that hard to get sudafed?
The article finishes with Helmke's statement "I want to get this problem solved."
My question for Paul is: What constitutes "solved"? What is going to solve the "gun problem"? How many laws is it going to take before 9 year olds no longer get shot by criminals? Is there a line you can draw? I want to know what that line is. What set of gun laws do you want passed which will solve the problem of gun violence. Give me a list, accompanied by a statement that says "once this is the national gun policy, we can stop because everything will be ok."
Give me that list, and I'll let you borrow my perpetual motion machine and my herd of avian-oinkers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | [Comments are closed after a month.] |
|
|
|
|
|
| < "MAGPUL PSH" | | "No Need For Firearms Safety Training" > |
|
|
|
|
