A very good friend has written a blog with a point of view quite different from  mine expressed in my last post (he usually writes about education, with an insider’s view; his blog is well worth reading).  Here’s what I put in his comment section:

Here’s a voice of reason… I’ve been thinking over your post and the various comments made in response.  I don’t see how a total ban on ‘guns’ would ever work.  But I do think there are a panoply of weapons that have no business in the private citizen’s gun cupboard.  Hunting guns? certainly.  Small hand guns for protection? if you must.  But automatic weapons that are designed for a battlefield?  no.  So why not a partial ban? We do that with fireworks, for heaven’s sake.  Small are okay, large, not (because they are dangerous). Then, I also think that anyone who wants to use a gun must prove that s/he knows how to use it responsibly.  We have to do that before we are allowed to drive automobiles.  People who have guns could be required to carry insurance in case of unforeseen accidents.  Perhaps the insurers would be more careful about background and mental health checks than gun stores are!  We require our doctors to carry insurance lest they hurt us; we require vehicle drivers to have both licenses (after passing two kinds of test) and insurance.  Why should we not regulate guns in the same manner?  They are every bit as lethal as cars, and I’m guessing a lot more lethal than your typical doctor.  And the regulations would not be any more onerous than those already in place for other situations.


I’m willing to back off my No Guns Ever Under Any Circumstances stance because I begin to see it’s probably impractical at the very least.  But I think the above are some pretty good ideas!

I promise to return to more light-hearted and on-blog-topic posts very very soon…