You know I am still way more troubled over the killing of those little children

[haele]

67. That's a reciprocity act, not a national standard act.

A federal law that would establish "well, whichever state has the loosest gun ownership and right to carry standards sets the standards across the country" - pretty much like the fugitive slave laws. And we saw how that part of history ended...

An actual National Standard is something the Gun Lobby and the NRA does not want, because to be Constitutional (that pesky "well regulated militia" clause), it would require registration standards and possibly training standards that, despite the lip-service to "responsible gun ownership" the Gun Lobby spouts to the general public, they have vehemently opposed in their conventions and gatherings to the point that most of the good ol' boys (and gals) honestly believe that registration and a national database is the first salvo in the UN plot to take away all the guns from all the upright responsible gun-owning citizens.

Look, the arguments over the Second Amendment are complex, especially when considering who benefits - and who profits - over lashing up public opinion on what that comma actually means and what part is the actual subject. What really needs to happen is a big sit down and honestly hash it out, but there's a lot of money on the line as well as lives and public good - and sadly, money has a louder voice than actual people or logic does.

I have a marksman's ribbon from my time in the Navy. I've been shot at, and unhappily had to deal with the aftermath of shootings - and I'm not afraid of guns. I know that the purpose of guns in to kill, and very little else - you don't pull out a gun outside of a range unless you intend to pull the trigger and kill someone.
So, again - how important is government's role in public safety? Is it more important than a paranoid's fantasies? Is it more important than the quarterly profits of gun manufacturers and their lobbying arms?
Can we sit down like grown-ups and actually talk about the issue rather than try to protect our perceived positions of power in society?

I doubt it, because, again - to Extremists, there can be "no weakness" that would come from a discussion that requires actual diplomacy.
You aren't going to get the "Ammo-sexuals" and the "Gun Grabbers" to talk, because neither are going to put down their arms long enough to talk. And the rest of us suffer, our friends and families are needlessly killed, and the mentally unstable still will be able to easily get weapons that allow them to spread mayham and destruction more quickly than most any other method available.

Haele