Racist? Strange, but okay?
People are required to carry liability insurance when they own a car. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the idea of strict licensing and regulation of firearms.
It all begins with chatter.
Not really strange. It seems that almost all such laws are racist in nature. As a Nation we had no need for such laws until ex slave owners in the post Civil War feared visits in the night. Then we got gun laws to disarm 'the other guy' (typical). This is the basis of the 'Saturday Night Special' laws (cheap handguns) they first sought to price guns out of the hands of the poor. So it became class prejudice as well. Still is, I guess, since those who would take your guns away still want their armed security. If fact, disarming you makes them safer? Remember when the champion gun grabber at the time, Ted Kennedy's body guard got caught with a full auto Mac 10 in the DC airport (where even loose ammo is a bust)? Let alone the gun was illegal. Nothing happened to the guy I understand, although he didn't get 'his gun' back.
Here in California we never had slaves, so we have repressive knife laws since we feared Mexicans who use knives (or so the logic goes). Gun (or other weapon) control is very often racist in nature since it's based on fear of folks you don't trust.
I agree citizens, law abiding and not, should be responsible for the use of the guns they own, same as other dangerous things. I'm big on responsibility. But the statement that "absolutely nothing" is wrong with licensing and registration ignores the idea this is a step to regulation, further restriction and concatenation. Examples abound. For instance detachable mag SKSs here. First they were legal, just declare them. Then illegal, turn them in or else. No problem finding you, they have a list. Fun thing, lists. IMO there's good reason to fear this escalation. Consider what no less a champion of gun rights as Nancy P. said today,
"They’re going to say, 'You give them bump stock, it's going to be a slippery slope.' I certainly hope so," she told a reporter at a news conference. From 'this side' the intent is clear no matter how 'reasonable, common sense' it might seem to others. Pirate Logic, straight from Captain Jack Sparrow, 'take what you can, give nothing back'. Saying there is "absolutely nothing wrong with the idea" is either dismissive of a LOT of gun owners honest experience based opinion or ignorant of it.
I disagree a bit with the last, discussion is key of course, but IMO it all begins with getting the facts straight. That means objectivity, which can, in turn, make it difficult or even impossible to get that good start? I'm in favor of honest discussion, of course, but right now I don't think ANTIFA is going to let John Lott speak...... Nor, do I think, many on 'either side' are listening that well since they both know the truth and know the other side is evil.
So them being scared, makes them more likely to shoot you? And you want them to be scared?
You honestly think that's the reason nobody's invaded??
In a fun way this idea, 'an armed American behind every bush' played heavily into Japanese thinking coming up to WWII. Pearl Harbor is credited by some to this idea (avoid an invasion at any cost) in fact. There is reason to fear 'citizen militias' which is why fascists are so fond of rounding up all the gun at the first opportunity?
In a fun way, 'we' left the Swiss alone (and neutral) in WWII in large part due to all the military rifles in the hands of trained citizens. I wouldn't try to convince them it has no value.
OF
Remember 1/2 of everyone you meet is below average in intelligence. The entire world is full of crazy, stupid, fraked up people.
(to me). I have used it in a non firing way agains an armed home intruder in the past. Having written all of that I can't disagree about a certain group with the mind set you write of.
