On Sun, 12 Jun 2022 at 12:09:38, Dick_Holder <dick_...@man.invalid>
wrote (my responses usually FOLLOW):
[]
>Guns aren't dangerous, people are.
That's true of (nearly) all weapons. And tools, and lots of other
things.
>The vast majority of gun owners are responsible, law abiding citizens.
I'll take your word for it. But the vast majority of people who get shot
are the result of gun use. (Yes, I know about arrows.)
>Guns aren't hunting down victims, the mentally ill are.
>Developing some sort of psychic test that keeps guns out of the hands
>of these mentally ill people is the trick.
Now there, I agree with you (though I question "the" as it implies it's
the total solution).
Such a test needs to be rigorously enforced, though.
>I think the age to buy, own, possess any kind of firearm should be set
>to 24 years of age.
The threshold can vary, but I agree with the principle. Though I
question the need for _anyone_ - however responsible - in civilian life
(other than perhaps law enforcement) to _own_ an _automatic_ forearm.
(Doesn't their _desire_ to own such, make their "responsible" status
questionable? Though yes, I do know it could be said that's a slippery
slope.)
>Teenagers/Tweenagers should be buying cars, _Windows 11_ computers,
>video games, DVD's ... not AR-15's.
(-: [Yes, they should be buying W11 computers, to keep the hardware
manufacturers in business.]
>That they are looking to buy guns at that young an age should raise a
>red flag.
>
AR-15s, or any gun?
The whole subject is complex: there's more to it than _just_ gun
ownership. UK has fairly tight rules, and I think our last school
shooting was 1996, i. e. 26 years ago; but conversely, I think
Switzerland _requires_ all citizens to own a firearm, and _they_ don't
have a lot of trouble. (Though I'm not sure what _type_ is involved
there.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
Advertising is legalized lying. - H.G. Wells