It's quiet simple, enforce existing laws against violent crime. Not harass law abiding gun owners with more laws criminals will ignore. Now it's your turn.
That sounds great. Where is that done with lax gun laws that has resulted in low gun deaths? I can tell you where it has been done with strict gun laws to achieve those results. You have to have something to enforce to make it work. But I agree ......proper enforcement is key
I gave you a valid answer. You need to show evidence how that in any way is a strawman. If anyone can just say the word strawmen to end a debate then that is just pretty silly. You can attack me personally if you want as well but it only weakens your argument when you have no evidence
That's not a very good metric for evaluating the effectiveness of a law. If almost everyone is following the new law you wouldn't expect many convictions. Connecticut experienced a 40% decline in its gun murder rate after all handgun purchasers (not just those buying from an FFL) were required to pass background checks.
If you believe in the rule of law why would you support loopholes that make it easy for people to circumvent the law? How about a drug show where you can do whatever drugs you want? Or an alcohol show where everyone under 21 can get drunk?
Given that people are still being shot by criminals using illegally obtained firearms at the same rate as before the law was passed, I'd say its the only metric to use. If the law were effective, shootings involving prohibited persons and/or unrecorded firearms would reduce, and/or more straw purchasers would be convicted. None of these are happening. WA State is essentially spending $10M/year to track law abiding gun owners and their lawfully purchased guns. Thats all that is being accomplished.