the booman @ the booman tribune:
my position on gun control is that it is best regulated at the local level, even though it is impossible to establish meaningful gun control if neighboring communities are completely permissive. part of it is that i care about other issues much more and do not want to lose political power over the issue. but, having lived in dangerous urban neighborhoods, i do not support laws that would deny me the right to provide myself protection that the police are clearly incapable of providing. i think the second amendment is an anachronism, but the proper way to deal with an anachronism is to amend the constitution, not ignore it. but, the second amendment is a federal right. it says that congress can't restrict your right to bear arms. it doesn't say squat about the state or local governments. that distinction is about to change. conservatives on the supreme court are going to strike down nearly every local or state gun control law in the country. this is the price of letting bush get reelected. i dropped everything in my life and worked my heart out (for ACORN) to prevent bush from being reelected. this is why.
leaving some states at the mercy of more permissive neighbors is exactly what puts me in the opposite camp, in support of consistent regulations from the federal level.
because of the second amendment, and because i think the problem is massive oversupply, i think the focus of gun control regulations should be on manufacturing, distribution and destruction instead of focusing on ownership.
you can't reduce an excess supply by reducing the number of legitimate buyers; you actually acerbate the problem. and while you have a constitutional right to own a gun, you have no such right to sell one.