Gun prohibition is akin to drug prohibition: a losing battle.

[TheWraith]

I live in New York State, which has some of the strictest statewide anti-handgun laws in the country. It's one of the oldest laws too, dating to 1911. To even own a handgun legally--not carry it, just own it at all and have it in your house--you need to jump through the following hoops. Pay $20 to get an application form. Fill it out with all sorts of juicy details. Not too bad so far. Also submit a full set of fingerprints and a mug shot. Then pay another $100 to have the form processed.

And wait. Legally, the issuing agency (local police) are supposed to get to it within six months, but it's been known to take up to a year. And really, there's no way to enforce the six month limit, and complaining about how long it takes might get you rejected. In fact, they can reject your application for ANY REASON, including that they're just in a bad mood that day, or they don't like you, or you're a Democrat, etcetera. And if that happens, you are permanently barred from owning a handgun in New York State unless you want to hire a lawyer and throw a few thousand dollars at the issue.

Let's suppose that you get approved. Then you've got to submit a letter to the police providing the make and model of the gun you intend to buy, its serial number, a spent shell casing, and drop another $55 to get it approved on your permit. Oh, and you've also got to pay $15 for additional "valid" copies of your permit, since you need to have one on you if you ever intend to carry the gun anywhere (even just to the shooting range). Failure to do any part of this may result in the revocation of your permit and the loss of any future right to own a gun.

Now considering how difficult and costly the state of New York has made it to get a gun legally, you'd think that either we'd have very few gun deaths, or they'd mostly be with rifles and shotguns, which are less regulated, right? Wrong. New York had 800 gun homicides in 2007. Less than fifty were with rifles and shotguns combined. And most of those handguns were, of course, obtained illegally, because legal gun owners rarely shoot people.

This is where the analogy to the drug war comes in, and the old definition of insanity as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. We've been trying to restrict the flow and use of drugs for 75+ years, and it's gotten us nowhere. We've been trying to restrict the availability of guns for the same period of time, and it's also gotten us nowhere. The idiocy in this situation is acting like doing more of the same thing and calling it a solution.

The obvious solution is to change the approach to the problem, and stop treating American citizens as if they're dangerous prisoners. Creating such a vital black market just empowers the people who really ARE dangerous. What we should say is that if you want to buy a gun, fine, and we'll focus on making sure criminals don't get them. If you want to buy a joint, fine, and we'll focus on making sure people don't get hooked on heroin.

But it's a lot easier for people to just scream emotional, nonsensical slogans like "Dead children! Soft on drugs! Soft on crime!" And to pretend that following an already failed strategy is somehow a plan to make things better.

[ZombieHorde]

1. I agree with the basic concept of your post, but you touched on a pet peeve of mine.

"definition of insanity as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results"

Flipping a coin.

Reciting something over and over for memorization purposes.

Panhandling.

Practicing a sport.

Enjoying a movie less the twentieth time it is viewed compared to the first time.

Etc.

Sorry that I felt the need to nitpick a minor aspect of your post.

[pipoman]

2. I'll see your examples and raise you

trickle down economics

driving too fast on ice

fishing in a septic pond

investing money with people who squander their own

panhandling on a deserted cul-de-sac

Watching a movie 20 times expecting a different ending

We all repeat things which result in the desired effect or promise a desired effect through improvement with practice. Einstein's definition of insanity is valid when the effect of the action is undesirable and the odds of improvement are nonexistent...this is the context which this definition is meant to be used.

[TheWraith]

3. Point taken, but it's a different class of thing.

You're talking about random chance, repeat necessities, recreation. My meaning is closer to putting together a 5 story house of hards, and wondering why it always collapses.

Anyway, it doesn't look like almost anyone else bothered to read my screed, so I guess I can't complain about your nit too much. :)

[X_Digger]

4. There you go, talking sense..

Either the usual suspects are grinding their axes or they're confounded by the sense of your statements. :)

[ZombieHorde]

7. Sorry, I know its just a silly pet peeve of mine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager">Pascal's wager is another one I have.

I wish I disagreed with you so we could start a debate, but my town in Montana is loaded (pun intended) with guns and we don't have shoot outs or anything like that here. We even had the cops go on strike years ago and nothing really happened. Edit to add: The cops are no longer striking, I just wanted to make that clear. I don't know if they got everything they wanted.

I used to own a firearm when I was a kid, but my parents eventually sold it because I had no interest in it. I just didn't care, my love was Dungeons & Dragons.

[TheWraith]

8. Poverty is the key.

Big cities have big problems with poverty. That's the root cause that feeds into all the major sources of violence: petty crime, drug addiction, and gang warfare.

While small towns have plenty of poverty, it tends to be subsistence-level poverty, not as intense as in a city. And there's not the same kind of opportunity to engage in illegal commerce like drug dealing. Alcohol prohibition is a great example of that: by creating an industry that is already outside the law, the people participating have no incentive to restrict their behavior. That's the difference between Al Capone and Budweiser.

[C......N......C]

5. Insanity would be like seeing the same movie

over and over and expecting a different ending. Or panhandling and expecting a civic commendation. Sorry, overlooked the other reference.

[C......N......C]

6. There is an old classic movie called "Topper"

And the guy sums it up in a reference to his wife. He says sometimes she just plain doesn't like things . Indicating she has no reason, just a feeling.