Why do criminals in other countries obey gun laws?

That's ironic. the NG is a militia....

 

OK police. fair enough.

 

It's a select militia, not a citizens militia... and the Founders wrote extensively condemning the idea of a select militia. The National Guard is NOT the militia as outlined in the Constitution.

 

Correct. The NG differs from a Reserve unit only in a governor's ability to call them out in emergencies.

 

Minority opinions are often cited, in some cases they are even held in higher regard than the majority. They are referenced for the reasoning, usually in terms of limiting the majority finding in some way.
There is a reason why they write and record them,.

Well that's the state's right. So in that instance there would be a total gun ban, hypothetically speaking, of course.

Its not unprecedented. The trouble in the USA is that there are so many unrecorded guns in unofficial circulation.

If I were to attempt it, I would first determine the grounds for the citizens militia.

I would then ban all sales of new guns outside the militia. This of course would be tremendous undertaking and all states would need to be coordinated, as well probably as Mexico. But you need to cut off the supply.

Then offer to licence all other gun owners and their weapons in a register, if one is not already there. Followed by an amnesty and "cash for guns" offer for the remaining. I would also make the government the mandatory counter-party for any gun transfers (ie inheritance, gifting etc), to start bringing in non-militia weapons.

Then massively pump up the penalty for unrecorded gun ownership. it would be a matter of finding and destroying as many unrecorded guns as and when they come to light through normal policing. After 20 or so years, the slow attrition of unrecorded guns would bring the number in circulation down by about 95%. At that stage I would then look at bringing in the recorded guns from non-militia.

But you're right in that just slapping a ban on guns would only disarm the law-abiding, which would be totally counter-productive. You have to keep the law-abiding armed whilst you reduce the risk, as a transitional arrangement.

Or you can simplify into all guns = bad. Trying to split hairs is a wasteful effort, in my view.

Agreed, so remove the item altogether unless the alternative uses justify its existence. Which in the case of guns, they simply don't.

Don't know, but presumably you would want to be looking for standing in the community, maybe some sort of personal vouching, that is automatically revoked if the person goes bad, and adequate training.

 

A wholly unsupportable conclusion.

 

Sounds like the bleatings of a U.K. subject,
Guns are baaad !
Guns are baaahhhhd !
Sheep be true, Sheep be true !

 

To say "all guns = bad" demonstrates that you do not hold a rational position. Your authoritarian views are noted, however. I fully understand your totalitarian stances, seeing as how you believe in surrender and submission over all other options.

 

If meet someone like me with the skills I developed growing up in Belfast using a knife for self defense, you will never see it coming and may not know you've been stabbed immediately. It's not like the movies, a knife attack by someone that knows what they are doing is more explosive, more like a prison stabbing, very fast, multiple strikes and very violent. Have a hint of a knife and you have a gun, best shoot.... multiple times until the assailant is stopped.

 

Totalitarians surrender?
Anyhow, its easier than trying to establish which guns are risky and which are not, seeing as all guns are risky to a lethal extent.

 

wasnt it the national guard?

why is that important?

 

The Militia according to US Code is all able bodied male citizens from age 18-45(ish). Each state regulates The Militia differently, but Ive yet to read a state constitution that didnt place The Militia under the direction of the governors office, generally giving the governor the power to order it to do anything but disband.

The NG btw is the 'Organized Militia' according to US Code.

 

There is also no sound argument whatsoever to support the position - as illustrated by the fact you cannot offer one.

 

Which is not the same as the militia, in toto.
The NG is part of the standing army - it is wholly trained, paid for, organized into and under the authority of the federal government.

 

someone asked how federal courts enforce rulings on states

 

What, that guns are risky? Tell me, which gun would you put in the hands of a four year old?

 

Yeah it was me. The NG responds to the president, rather than the court, though...

 

You were unhappy earlier that unionists had guns, indicating perhaps the you would have preferred guns. Why would you have preferred guns if you thought knives were better?

 

No....your impossibly absurd and utterly unsupportable statement that we should assume all guns are bad guns.

 

A Cricket, perhaps, under close adult supervision. Why?

 

yeah that's true. in that case, they were both on the same page

 

Why under close adult supervision?

 

Silly question... did I indicate a preference that would prompt you to ask that question, or are you just trolling along?

 

Because it's a four year old with a potentially dangerous object. I'd closely supervise a four year old making soup or toast, too. I'd double check a four year old putting on their own seatbelt.

 

Nope.